Placement into Scattered-Site or Place-Based Permanent Supportive Housing in Los Angeles County, CA, During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

There are two dominant approaches to implementing permanent supportive housing (PSH), namely place-based (PB) and scattered-site (SS). Formal guidance does not distinguish between these two models and only specifies that PSH should be reserved for those who are most vulnerable with complex health needs. To consider both system- and self-selection factors that may affect housing assignment, this study applied the Gelberg-Anderson behavioral model for vulnerable populations to compare predisposing, enabling, and need factors among people experiencing homelessness (PE) by whether they were assigned to PB-PSH (n = 272) or SS-PSH (n = 185) in Los Angeles County during the COVID-19 pandemic. This exploratory, observational study also included those who were approved but did not receive PSH (n = 94). Results show that there are notable differences between (a) those who received PSH versus those who did not, and (b) those in PB-PSH versus SS-PSH. Specifically, PEH who received PSH were more likely to be white, US-born, have any physical health condition, and have lower health activation scores. PEH who received PB- versus SS-PSH were more likely to be older, Black, have any alcohol use disorder, and have higher health activation scores. These findings suggest that homeless service systems may consider PB-PSH more appropriate for PEH with higher needs but also raises important questions about how race may be a factor in the type of PSH that PEH receive and whether PSH is received at all.

Bringing Lived Experience to Research on Health and Homelessness: Perspectives of Researchers and Lived Experience Partners.

Improving health and healthcare for people experiencing homelessness (PEH) has become a national research priority. It is critical for research related to homelessness to be guided by input from PEH themselves. We are a group of researchers and individuals who have personally experienced homelessness collaborating on a study focused on homelessness and housing. In this Fresh Focus, we describe our partnership, lessons learned from our work together, what we have gained from our collaboration, and considerations for future homelessness research-lived experience partnerships.

Assessing Assessments: Substance use disorder treatment providers' perceptions of intake assessments.

Background: Assessments to determine patients' treatment needs and preferences when they begin substance use disorder (SUD) treatment are essential. The objectives of this paper are to identify the perspectives of providers who conduct assessments on (1) assessments' utility in determining the level of care where patients will receive treatment, (2) strategies to engage patients in treatment during assessments, and (3) assessment strengths and shortcomings. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 California treatment providers who routinely perform SUD assessments for Medicaid beneficiaries. Interviews asked about the utility of assessment tools in determining appropriate levels of care, patient engagement during assessments, and strengths and shortcomings of intake assessment processes. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by multiple researchers using template analysis. Results: Providers reported that assessments linked to level-of-care decision rules sometimes generate recommendations inconsistent with their clinical judgment, and that the timing of assessments can influence the quality of the information collected. Providers described engagement strategies that help patients feel more comfortable during assessments and that encourage more thoughtful and accurate responses. Providers valued assessments that helped ensure comprehensive collection of patient information, that allowed flexibility to probe for additional information and context, and that facilitated treatment planning. Providers did not like assessments that were long and repetitive or those that did not collect detailed information about patients' mental health and recovery environments. Conclusions: Assessments can be improved if providers conduct them in a manner that makes patients feel comfortable while building trust and rapport. Ensuring that assessments are not long or repetitive and giving comprehensive assessments once patients have developed trusting relationships with treatment programs can improve assessment processes. Further research is needed to optimize SUD assessments.

Rapid Adoption of Low-Threshold Buprenorphine Treatment at California Emergency Departments Participating in the CA Bridge Program.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We retrospectively evaluated the implementation of low-threshold emergency department (ED) buprenorphine treatment at 52 hospitals participating in the CA Bridge Program using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework. METHODS: The CA Bridge model included low-threshold buprenorphine, connection to outpatient care, and harm reduction. Implementation began in March 2019. Participating hospitals reported aggregated clinical data monthly after program initiation. Outcomes included identification of opioid use disorder, buprenorphine administration, and linkage to outpatient addiction treatment. Multivariable models assessed associations between hospital location (rural versus urban) and teaching status (clinical teaching hospital versus community hospital) and outcomes in adopting the CA Bridge Program. RESULTS: Reach: A diverse and geographically distributed group of 52 California hospitals were enrolled in 2 phases (March and August 2019); 12 (23%) were rural and 13 (25%) were teaching hospitals. Effectiveness: Over a 14-month implementation period, 12,009 opioid use disorder patient encounters were identified, including 7,179 (59.7%) where buprenorphine was administered and 4,818 (40.1%) where follow-up visits were attended. Adoption: In multivariable analysis, adoption did not differ significantly between rural and urban or teaching and nonteaching hospitals. IMPLEMENTATION: By program completion, all 52 (100%) hospitals treated opioid use disorder with buprenorphine; 45 (86.5%) administered buprenorphine after naloxone reversal; 41 (84.6%) offered buprenorphine for inpatients; 48 (92.3%) initiated buprenorphine in pregnant women; and 29 (55.8%) offered take-home naloxone. Maintenance: At 8-month follow-up, all 52 sites reported continued buprenorphine treatment. CONCLUSION: Low-threshold ED buprenorphine treatment implemented with a harm reduction approach and active navigation to outpatient addiction treatment was successful in achieving buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder in diverse California communities.

"The assessment really helps you with the first step in recovery." What do clients think substance use disorder treatment intake assessments should look like?

Background: In general, research has found that patient-centered substance use disorder treatment is positively correlated with improved patient outcomes. However, little research has examined what factors make intake assessments-the first step in addiction treatment-patient-centered. Methods: We conducted interviews with 30 Medicaid-enrolled individuals who received addiction treatment in California about their experiences with the intake assessment process. Results: Participants reported that the intake assessment process evoked strong feelings, both positive and negative. Some participants said that answering detailed questions about their substance use, mental health, and social relationships, for example, was cathartic and gave them helpful insights. Other participants found the questions invasive, exhausting, and anxiety provoking. Participants also emphasized how critical it is for the person conducting the assessment to be supportive, nonjudgmental, and attentive. Participants recommended delaying the comprehensive assessment because they did not feel physically or emotionally ready to complete the intake. Conclusions and recommendations: Patients' introduction to addiction treatment is typically the intake assessment. By understanding how patients experience intake assessments, providers can make the process more patient-centered, which may lead to improved patient outcomes.

Program Capacity to Deliver Prevention Services to Children of Adult Clients Receiving Substance Use Disorder Treatment.

Children whose parents have a history of substance use are at elevated risk of developing substance use disorders (SUDs) and related debilitating behaviors. Although specialty treatment programs are uniquely positioned to deliver prevention care to children of adult clients, these programs may have limited capacity to implement prevention and early intervention care services, particularly in racial and ethnic minority communities. We merged data from program surveys and client records collected in 2015 to examine the extent to which program capacity factors are associated with the odds of delivering prevention and early intervention services for children of adult clients attending outpatient SUD treatment in low-income minority communities in Los Angeles County, California. Our analytic sample consisted of 16,712 clients embedded in 82 programs. Our results show that 85% of these programs reported delivering prevention care services, while 71% of programs delivered early intervention services. Programs with organizational climates supporting change and those that served a high number of clients annually were more likely to implement both prevention and early intervention practices. Programs accepting Medicaid payments and serving clients whose primary drug was marijuana were more than three times as likely to implement prevention services. Overall, our findings suggest both program- and client-level characteristics are associated with delivering preventive care offered to children of adult clients receiving SUD treatment in communities of color. As Medicaid has become a major payor of SUD treatment services and marijuana use has been legalized in California, findings identify capacity factors to deliver public health prevention interventions in one of the nation's largest public SUD treatment systems.

Expected Impact of Health Care Reform on the Organization and Service Delivery of Publicly Funded Addiction Health Services.

Little is known about how the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will be implemented in publicly funded addiction health services (AHS) organizations. Guided by a conceptual model of implementation of new practices in health care systems, this study relied on qualitative data collected in 2013 from 30 AHS clinical supervisors in Los Angeles County, California. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using a constructivist grounded theory approach with ATLAS.ti software. Supervisors expected several potential effects of ACA implementation, including increased use of AHS services, shifts in the duration and intensity of AHS services, and workforce professionalization. However, supervisors were not prepared for actions to align their programs' strategic change plans with policy expectations. Findings point to the need for health care policy interventions to help treatment providers effectively respond to ACA principles of improving standards of care and reducing disparities.

Leadership and Licensure for Drug Treatment and the Implementation of Co-Occurring Disorder Treatment in Community Mental Health Centers.

Using a random sample of 48 outpatient mental health programs in low-income and racial and ethnic minority communities, this study examined directorial leadership, drug treatment licensure, and implementation of evidence-based protocols and practices to address co-occurring mental health and substance abuse disorders (COD). Understanding of findings was enhanced with focus groups at six clinics. Most programs (81 %) offered COD treatment. Directorial leadership was positively associated with COD treatment (ß = 0.253, p = 0.047, 95 % CI 0.003, 0.502) and COD supervision and training (ß = 0.358, p = 0.002, 95 % CI 0.142, 0.575). Licensure was negatively associated with COD treatment (ß = -0.235, p = 0.041, 95 % CI -0.460, -0.010) and COD supervision and training (ß = -0.195, p = 0.049, 95 % CI -0.389, -0.001). Although lack of financial integration may limit the effect of licensing on COD treatment implementation, the response of leaders to regulation, funding, and human resources issues may encourage COD treatment practices. Implications for leadership interventions and policy are discussed in the context of health care reform.

Barriers to drug use behavior change among primary care patients in urban United States community health centers.

In 2011 and 2012, 147 patients in urban United States Community Health Centers who misused drugs, but did not meet criteria for drug dependence, received a brief intervention as part of a National Institute on Drug Abuse-funded clinical trial of a screening and brief intervention protocol. Potential study participants were identified using the World Health Organization (WHO) Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test. Data gathered during brief interventions were analyzed using grounded theory strategies to identify barriers patients believed inhibited drug use behavior change. Numerous perceived barriers to drug use behavior change were identified. Study implications and limitations are discussed.

Adult use cannabis legalization and cannabis use disorder treatment in California, 2010-2021.

INTRODUCTION: Many nations and jurisdictions have legalized non-medical adult use of cannabis, or are considering doing so. This paper contributes to knowledge of adult use legalization's associations with cannabis use disorder (CUD) treatment utilization. METHODS: This study collected data from a dataset of all publicly funded substance use disorder treatment delivered in California from 2010 to 2021 (1,460,066 episodes). A logistic regression model estimates adult use legalization's impacts on CUD treatment utilization using an individual-level pre-post time series model, including individual and county-level characteristics and county and year-fixed effects. RESULTS: Adult use legalization was associated with a significant decrease in the probability of admission to CUD treatment (average marginal effect (AME): -0.005, 95 % CI: -0.009, 0.000). Adult use legalization was also associated with a decrease in the probability of admission to CUD treatment for males (AME: -0.025, 95 % CI: -0.027, -0.023) Medi-Cal beneficiaries (AME: -0.025, 95 % CI: -0.027, -0.023) adults ages 21+ (AME: -0.011, 95 % CI: -0.014, -0.009) and Whites (AME: -0.012, 95 % CI: -0.015, -0.010), and an increase in the probability of admission to CUD treatment for patients referred from the criminal justice system (AME: 0.017, 95 % CI: 0.015, 0.020) and Blacks (AME: 0.004, 95 % CI: 0.000, 0.007) and Hispanics (AME: 0.009, 95 % CI: 0.006, 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Adult use legalization is associated with declining CUD treatment admissions, even though cannabis-related problems are becoming more prevalent. Policies and practices that protect public health, and engage people with CUD in treatment are needed.

Homelessness, Discrimination, and Violent Victimization in Los Angeles County.

INTRODUCTION: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) are highly vulnerable to discrimination and violence, which impact physical and mental health. The study examines past-month discrimination and violence against PEH in Los Angeles County (LAC). METHODS: A total of 332 PEH in LAC were surveyed about their past-month experiences with discrimination, physical violence, and sexual violence from April-July 2023. Analyses were conducted in 2023. RESULTS: 31.8% of respondents reported experiencing discrimination daily and 53.9% reported it weekly, whereas rates of lifetime discrimination in studies of general populations of minoritized groups range between 13-60%. Nearly half of respondents who reported experiencing discrimination (49.6%) believed that their housing situation was the reason they were targeted. Victimization was also common, with 16.0% of participants experiencing physical violence and 7.5% experiencing sexual violence in the past 30 days. These rates of past-month victimization are high when compared to past-year physical violence (3.0%) and sexual violence (0.24%) among general populations in major U.S. cities. In multivariate regression analyses, discrimination was associated with being unsheltered in a vehicle (p<0.05) or outdoors (p<0.001), weekly illicit drug use (p<0.01), and psychological distress (p<0.001); violent victimization was associated with being sheltered (p<0.05) or unsheltered outdoors (p<0.001), physical health conditions (p<0.05), and psychological distress (p<0.01); and sexual victimization was associated with non-male gender (p<0.05) and being unsheltered outdoors (p<0.05). Discrimination and victimization outcomes were not associated with any race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, or time homeless characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings highlight the dangers of homelessness in the U.S., particularly for those who are unsheltered outdoors.

Dual Diagnosis Capability in Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Treatment Programs.

OBJECTIVE: Improved understanding of the relative strengths and weaknesses of treatment organizations' dual diagnosis capability is critical in order to guide efforts to improve services. This study assesses programs' capacity to meet the needs of clients with dual diagnosis, identifies areas where they are well equipped to serve these clients, and determines where programmatic improvement is needed. The study also undertakes an initial exploration of the potential impact that funding sources have on dual diagnosis capability. METHODS: We administered Dual Diagnosis Capability in Addiction Treatment (DDCAT) and Dual Diagnosis Capability in Mental Health Treatment (DDCMHT) assessments at 30 treatment programs in two California counties. Seven of the programs received funding to provide both mental health and substance use disorder services, 13 received funding to provide mental health services, and 10 received funding to provide substance use disorder services. RESULTS: The mean DDCAT/DDCMHT score of programs in the sample was 2.83, and just over 43% of the sample met or exceeded DDCAT/DDCMHT criteria for dual diagnosis capability. Programs scored highest and had the highest rates of dual diagnosis capability in domains related to assessment, training, and staffing, whereas scores were weakest and rates of dual diagnosis capability were lowest in the program structure, treatment, and continuity of care domains. Programs that received funding to provide both mental health and substance use disorder services consistently scored higher than the other programs in the sample, and mental health programs scored higher than substance use disorder treatment programs both on the overall assessments and in most domains. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that programs in the sample are functioning at a nearly dual diagnosis capable level. However, structural barriers continue to limit providers' capacity to serve clients with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders, and many organizations have not yet translated their potential to deliver dual diagnosis capable services into practice. By enhancing their program structure, treatment services, and continuity of care services, these treatment organizations should be able to deliver fully dual diagnosis capable services. Observed differences in dual diagnosis capability based on funding source indicate a need for further research to better understand the impact that funding streams have on dual diagnosis capability.

Investigating the Comparative Effectiveness of Place-Based and Scatter-Site Permanent Supportive Housing for People Experiencing Homelessness During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Protocols for a Mixed Methods, Prospective Longitudinal Study.

BACKGROUND: Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is an evidence-based practice to address homelessness that is implemented using 2 distinct approaches. The first approach is place-based PSH (PB-PSH), or single-site housing placement, in which an entire building with on-site services is designated for people experiencing homelessness. The second approach is scatter-site PSH (SS-PSH), which uses apartments rented from a private landlord while providing mobile case management services. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the protocols for a mixed methods comparative effectiveness study of 2 distinct approaches to implementing PSH and the patient-centered quality of life, health care use, and health behaviors that reduce COVID-19 risk. METHODS: People experiencing homelessness who are placed in either PB-PSH or SS-PSH completed 6 monthly surveys after move-in using smartphones provided by the study team. A subsample of participants completed 3 qualitative interviews at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months that included photo elicitation interviewing. Two stakeholder advisory groups, including one featuring people with lived experience of homelessness, helped guide study decisions and interpretations of findings. RESULTS: Study recruitment was supposed to occur over 6 months starting in January 2021 but was extended due to delays in recruitment. These delays included COVID-19 delays (eg, recruitment sites shut down due to outbreaks and study team members testing positive) and delays that may have been indirectly related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including high staff turnover or recruitment sites having competing priorities. In end-July 2022, in total, 641 people experiencing homelessness had been referred from 26 partnering recruitment sites, and 563 people experiencing homelessness had enrolled in the study and completed a baseline demographic survey. Of the 563 participants in the study, 452 had recently moved into the housing when they enrolled, with 272 placed in PB-PSH and 180 placed in SS-PSH. Another 111 participants were approved but are still waiting for housing placement. To date, 49 participants have been lost to follow-up, and 12% of phones (70 of the initial 563 distributed) were reported lost by participants. CONCLUSIONS: Recruitment during the pandemic, while successful, was challenging given that in-person contact was not permitted at times either by program sites or the research institutions during COVID-19 surges and high community transmission, which particularly affected homelessness programs in Los Angeles County. To overcome recruitment challenges, flexible strategies were used, which included extending the recruitment period and the distribution of cell phones with paid data plans. Given current recruitment numbers and retention rates that are over 90%, the study will be able to address a gap in the literature by considering the comparative effectiveness of PB-PSH versus SS-PSH on patient-centered quality of life, health care use, and health behaviors that reduce COVID-19 risk, which can influence future public health approaches to homelessness and infectious diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04769349; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04769349. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46782.

Integrating substance use disorder services with primary care: the experience in California.

Integrating substance use disorder (SUD) services with primary care (PC) can improve access to SUD services for the 20.9 million Americans who need SUD treatment but do not receive it, and help prevent the onset of SUDs among the 68 million Americans who use psychoactive substances in a risky manner. We lay out the reasons for integrating SUD and PC services and then explore the models used and the experiences of providers as they have begun SUD/PC integration in California.

What's in an "ASAM-based Assessment?" Variations in Assessment and Level of Care Determination in Systems Required to Use ASAM Patient Placement Criteria.

OBJECTIVES: When clients begin substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, it is critical to ensure that they receive treatment that matches their needs and preferences. A growing number of payors are requiring the use of multidimensional assessments such as assessments based on the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) criteria, which describe 6 dimensions that should be used to inform decisions about patient placement. However, ASAM guidance does not list specific questions to ask or instruments to use to elicit this information. This paper evaluates differences among the assessment tools being used by SUD service systems that are required to use ASAM-based assessments to make patient placement decisions. METHODS: We analyzed 29 different ASAM-based assessments being used by California counties to make patient placement decisions using conventional and summative content analysis techniques. RESULTS: All assessments were organized by the 6 ASAM dimensions. However, some of them only ask 1 or 2 questions per dimension, while others ask over 20, and some ask over 100 depending on patient responses. There is significant heterogeneity in the information the assessments collect and how it is used to generate patient placement decisions. Among the 29 assessments examined, there are 8 different algorithms or instructions on how to translate information from assessments into level of care recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The differences among the ASAM-based assessments examined in this paper suggest a need to implement fidelity standards, enhance training, and create resources to help systems create and utilize assessment and patient placement tools that are consistent across the SUD treatment field.

Homelessness and publicly funded substance use disorder treatment in California, 2016-2019: Analysis of treatment needs, level of care placement, and outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Both homelessness and substance use have increased in recent years. People experiencing homelessness (PEH) are at increased risk for health problems and early mortality, both of which can be exacerbated by substance use disorders (SUD). Specialty SUD treatment is likely needed to address substance use among PEH, and more than 232,000 PEH received treatment from U.S. publicly funded SUD programs in 2015. The objective of this paper is to develop a better understanding of the SUD services that PEH receive in publicly funded treatment programs by (1) describing the characteristics and needs of the PEH population served in publicly funded SUD treatment programs, compared to non-PEH populations; (2) determining if differences exist in treatment placement (level of care) for PEH and non-PEH; and (3) gauging how successful programs are in treating PEH compared to non-PEH. METHODS: Observational study using a two-way fixed effect model to determine associations among homelessness, retention, and outcomes among Medicaid beneficiaries receiving SUD treatment in California from 2016 to 2019 (n = 638,953). The study team used ordinary least squares (OLS) regression to measure the degree to which homelessness was associated with baseline characteristics, SUD services received, and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: PEH were significantly more likely than non-PEH to be having methamphetamine or heroin as their primary substance. PEH had greater frequency of primary substance use prior to entering treatment, greater ER and hospital utilization, more criminal justice involvement, and greater prevalence of mental health diagnoses and unemployment. PEH were 9.82% more likely than non-PEH to receive residential treatment and 7.11% less likely than non-PEH to receive treatment intensive outpatient modalities. Homelessness was associated with an 11.90% decrease in retention, and a 19.40% decrease in successful discharge status. These trends were consistent across outpatient, intensive outpatient, and residential modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Developing SUD treatment capacity and housing supports can improve treatment outcomes for PEH. Potential strategies to improve SUD services for PEH include providing more contingency management, opioid pharmacotherapies, programming designed to treat individuals with co-occurring mental health disorders, and resources for housing options that can support PEH in their recovery.

Addiction Treatment and Telehealth: Review of Efficacy and Provider Insights During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Addiction treatment via telehealth expanded to unprecedented levels during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to clarify whether the research evidence on the efficacy of telehealth-delivered substance use disorder treatment and the experience of providers using telehealth during the pandemic support continued use of telehealth after the pandemic and, if so, under what circumstances. METHODS: Data sources included a literature review on the efficacy of telehealth for substance use disorder treatment, responses to a 2020 online survey from 100 California addiction treatment providers, and interviews with 30 California treatment providers and other stakeholders. RESULTS: Eight published studies were identified that compared addiction treatment via telehealth with in-person treatment. Seven found telehealth treatment as effective but not more effective than in-person treatment in terms of retention, therapeutic alliance, and substance use. One Canadian study found that telehealth facilitated methadone prescribing and improved retention. In the survey results reported here, California addiction treatment providers said that more than 50% of their patients were being treated via telehealth for intensive outpatient treatment, individual counseling, group counseling, and intake assessment. They were most confident that individual counseling via telehealth was as effective as in-person individual counseling and less sure about the relative effectiveness of telehealth-delivered medication management, group counseling, and intake assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth may help engage patients in addiction treatment by improving access and convenience. Additional research is needed to confirm that benefit and to determine how best to tailor telehealth to each patient's circumstances and with what mix of in-person and telehealth services.

Medical conditions of primary care patients with documented cannabis use and cannabis use disorder in electronic health records: a case control study from an academic health system in a medical marijuana state.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 3.8% of adults worldwide have used cannabis in the past year. Understanding how cannabis use is associated with other health conditions is crucial for healthcare providers seeking to understand the needs of their patients, and for health policymakers. This paper analyzes the relationship between documented cannabis use disorders (CUD), cannabis use (CU) and other health diagnoses among primary care patients during a time when medical use of marijuana was permitted by state law in California, United States of America. METHODS: The study utilized primary care electronic health record (EHR) data from an academic health system, using a case-control design to compare diagnoses among individuals with CUD/CU to those of matched controls, and those of individuals with CUD diagnoses with individuals who had CU otherwise documented. Associations of documented CU and CUD with general medical conditions and health conditions associated with cannabis use (both medical and behavioral) were analyzed using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 1,047,463 patients with ambulatory encounters from 2013-2017, 729 (0.06%) had CUD diagnoses and 3,731 (0.36%) had CU documented in their EHR. Patients with documented CUD and CU patients had significantly (p < 0.01) higher odds of most medical and behavioral diagnoses analyzed. Compared to matched controls, CUD-documented patients had highest odds of other substance use disorders (OR = 21.44: 95% CI 9.43-48.73), any mental health disorder (OR = 6.99; 95% CI 5.03-9.70) social anxiety disorder (OR = 13.03; 95% CI 2.18-77.94), HIV/AIDS (OR = 7.88: 95% CI 2.58-24.08), post-traumatic stress disorder (OR = 7.74: 95% CI 2.66-22.51); depression (OR = 7.01: 95% CI 4,79-10.27), and bipolar disorder (OR = 6.49: 95% CI 2.90-14.52). Compared to matched controls, CU-documented patients had highest odds of other substance use disorders (OR = 3.64; 95% CI 2.53-5.25) and post-traumatic stress disorder (OR = 3.41; 95% CI 2.53-5.25). CUD-documented patients were significantly more likely than CU-documented patients to have HIV/AIDS (OR = 6.70; 95% CI 2.10-21.39), other substance use disorder (OR = 5.88; 95% CI 2.42-14.22), depression (OR = 2.85; 95% CI 1.90-4.26), and anxiety (OR = 2.19: 95% CI 1.57-3.05) diagnoses. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of CUD and CU notation in EHR data from an academic health system was low, highlighting the need for improved screening in primary care. CUD and CU documentation were associated with increased risk for many health conditions, with the most elevated risk for behavioral health disorders and HIV/AIDS (among CUD-documented, but not CU-documented patients). Given the strong associations of CUD and CU documentation with health problems, it is important for healthcare providers to be prepared to identify CU and CUD, discuss the pros and cons of cannabis use with patients thoughtfully and empathically, and address cannabis-related comorbidities among these patients.

Impact of the Coronavirus Pandemic on Substance Use Disorder Treatment: Findings from a Survey of Specialty Providers in California.

BACKGROUND: As the coronavirus pandemic public health emergency begins to ebb in the United States, policymakers and providers need to evaluate how the addiction treatment system functioned during the public health emergency and draw lessons for future emergencies. One important question is whether the pandemic curtailed the use of addiction treatment and the extent to which telehealth was able to mitigate access barriers. METHODS: To begin to answer this question, we conducted a survey of specialty addiction treatment providers in California from June 2020 through July 2020. The survey focused specifically on provider organizations that served Medicaid beneficiaries. RESULTS: Of the 133 respondents, 50% reported a decrease in patients since the stay-at-home order in March 2020, with the largest decline among new patients, and 58% said more patients were relapsing. Eighty-one percent of providers said that telemedicine use had increased since the stay-at-home order. Most said that telemedicine had moderately (48%) or completely (30%) addressed access barriers. CONCLUSION: More efforts are needed to ensure that patients, and in particular new patients, receive addiction treatment during public health emergencies.

How Patient Centered Are Addiction Treatment Intake Processes?

OBJECTIVES: The substance use disorder (SUD) treatment field has conducted significant research on creating intake tools and processes that best match patients to the most appropriate treatment setting, but less research has been conducted on how those tools impact the patient experience. The study took advantage of a natural experiment in California to evaluate whether the implementation of American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) assessment criteria and a computer-facilitated intake assessment based on the ASAM criteria affects patient experiences and patient-centeredness during intake relative to patients receiving intake assessments not based on ASAM criteria. METHODS: We analyzed surveys completed by 851 patients covered by Medi-Cal who were receiving specialty SUD treatment at 33 providers across 10 California counties about their experiences and perceptions of the intake assessment process. To account for differences in patient mix, we used inverse-probability weighting and computed differences in the weighted means for patients across non-ASAM, ASAM, and computerized-ASAM patients. RESULTS: We have found that patients who underwent intake based on ASAM assessment criteria or computerized ASAM assessment experienced a more patient-centered intake. We also found that patients who received ASAM-based assessments were more satisfied with their choice of treatment setting. CONCLUSIONS: This evidence is encouraging for the SUD treatment field, especially considering that many Medicaid programs are adopting ASAM or similar patient placement criteria and multidimensional assessments. Future research should consider whether increases in the patient-centeredness of assessments are associated with increased retention in SUD treatment and other positive treatment outcomes.