History and current status of contingency management programs in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

OBJECTIVE: This article describes the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) national implementation of contingency management within VA substance use disorder (SUD) treatment programs. METHODS: The rationale for implementing CM, role of VA leadership, and training and supervision procedures are detailed. The role of the Veterans Canteen Service (VCS) in sustaining the CM implementation through the donation of incentives is outlined. Updated outcomes from the primary program, CM to incentivize stimulant abstinence, are provided. Data presented were gathered from June 2011 to January 2023, from VA facilities across the country. RESULTS: More than 6000 Veterans from 119 VA facilities have received CM in a 12-week program in which two urine samples are obtained per week, with 92% of the samples negative for the targeted substance. Two other CM pilot projects are described. The first incentivizes adherence to injectable medications for opioid and alcohol use disorders, with over 580 veterans from 27 VA sites participating to date. The second incentivized smoking cessation in 312 patients from four sites. A new initiative in which CM is implemented in smaller community-based VA facilities through use of onsite prize cabinets is presented and the possibility of providing CM remotely in VA is discussed. CONCLUSIONS: It has proved feasible to implement abstinence CM and several other CM pilot programs at many VA facilities. Factors that contributed to the success of the VA CM rollout, challenges that were encountered along the way, and lessons learned that may facilitate wider use of CM outside VA are discussed.

Accessibility to Medication for Opioid Use Disorder After Interventions to Improve Prescribing Among Nonaddiction Clinics in the US Veterans Health Care System.

Importance: With increasing rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths in the US, increased access to medications for OUD (MOUD) is paramount. Rigorous effectiveness evaluations of large-scale implementation initiatives using quasi-experimental designs are needed to inform expansion efforts. Objective: To evaluate a US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initiative to increase MOUD use in nonaddiction clinics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement initiative used interrupted time series design to compare trends in MOUD receipt. Primary care, pain, and mental health clinics in the VA health care system (n = 35) located at 18 intervention facilities and nonintervention comparison clinics (n = 35) were matched on preimplementation MOUD prescribing trends, clinic size, and facility complexity. The cohort of patients with OUD who received care in intervention or comparison clinics in the year after September 1, 2018, were evaluated. The preimplementation period extended from September 1, 2017, through August 31, 2018, and the postimplementation period from September 1, 2018, through August 31, 2019. Exposures: The multifaceted implementation intervention included education, external facilitation, and quarterly reports. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the proportion of patients receiving MOUD and the number of patients per clinician prescribing MOUD. Segmented logistic regression evaluated monthly proportions of MOUD receipt 1 year before and after initiative launch, adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. Poisson regression models examined yearly changes in clinician prescribing over the same time frame. Results: Overall, 7488 patients were seen in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.3 [14.2] years; 6858 [91.6%] male; 1476 [19.7%] Black, 417 [5.6%] Hispanic; 5162 [68.9%] White; 239 [3.2%] other race [including American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and multiple races]; and 194 [2.6%] unknown) and 7558 in comparison clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.4 [14.0] years; 6943 [91.9%] male; 1463 [19.4%] Black; 405 [5.4%] Hispanic; 5196 [68.9%] White; 244 [3.2%] other race; 250 [3.3%] unknown). During the preimplementation year, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD in intervention clinics increased monthly by 5.0% (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07). Accounting for this preimplementation trend, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD increased monthly by an additional 2.3% (AOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04) during the implementation year. Comparison clinics increased by 2.6% monthly before implementation (AOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04), with no changes detected after implementation. Although preimplementation-year trends in monthly MOUD receipt were similar in intervention and comparison clinics, greater increases were seen in intervention clinics after implementation (AOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08). Patients treated with MOUD per clinician in intervention clinics saw greater increases from before to after implementation compared with comparison clinics (incidence rate ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.28-1.77). Conclusions and Relevance: A multifaceted implementation initiative in nonaddiction clinics was associated with increased MOUD prescribing. Findings suggest that engagement of clinicians in general clinical settings may increase MOUD access.

VA residential substance use disorder treatment program providers' perceptions of facilitators and barriers to performance on pre-admission processes.

BACKGROUND: In the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), residential treatment programs are an important part of the continuum of care for patients with a substance use disorder (SUD). However, a limited number of program-specific measures to identify quality gaps in SUD residential programs exist. This study aimed to: (1) Develop metrics for two pre-admission processes: Wait Time and Engagement While Waiting, and (2) Interview program management and staff about program structures and processes that may contribute to performance on these metrics. The first aim sought to supplement the VA's existing facility-level performance metrics with SUD program-level metrics in order to identify high-value targets for quality improvement. The second aim recognized that not all key processes are reflected in the administrative data, and even when they are, new insight may be gained from viewing these data in the context of day-to-day clinical practice. METHODS: VA administrative data from fiscal year 2012 were used to calculate pre-admission metrics for 97 programs (63 SUD Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Programs (SUD RRTPs); 34 Mental Health Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Programs (MH RRTPs) with a SUD track). Interviews were then conducted with management and front-line staff to learn what factors may have contributed to high or low performance, relative to the national average for their program type. We hypothesized that speaking directly to residential program staff may reveal innovative practices, areas for improvement, and factors that may explain system-wide variability in performance. RESULTS: Average wait time for admission was 16 days (SUD RRTPs: 17 days; MH RRTPs with a SUD track: 11 days), with 60% of Veterans waiting longer than 7 days. For these Veterans, engagement while waiting occurred in an average of 54% of the waiting weeks (range 3-100% across programs). Fifty-nine interviews representing 44 programs revealed factors perceived to potentially impact performance in these domains. Efficient screening processes, effective patient flow, and available beds were perceived to facilitate shorter wait times, while lack of beds, poor staffing levels, and lengths of stay of existing patients were thought to lengthen wait times. Accessible outpatient services, strong patient outreach, and strong encouragement of pre-admission outpatient treatment emerged as facilitators of engagement while waiting; poor staffing levels, socioeconomic barriers, and low patient motivation were viewed as barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Metrics for pre-admission processes can be helpful for monitoring residential SUD treatment programs. Interviewing program management and staff about drivers of performance metrics can play a complementary role by identifying innovative and other strong practices, as well as high-value targets for quality improvement. Key facilitators of high-performing facilities may offer programs with lower performance useful strategies to improve specific pre-admission processes.

Contracting, prompting and reinforcing substance use disorder continuing care.

The contracting, prompting and reinforcing (CPR) aftercare intervention has improved treatment adherence and outcomes in a number of clinical trials. In multisite randomized clinical trial 92 graduates of two intensive substance use disorder programs who received CPR were compared to 91 who received standard treatment (STX). The CPR group evidenced increased frequency of aftercare group therapy attendance and near significant findings suggested that more CPR than STX participants completed 3 months (76 vs. 64%), 6 months (48 vs. 35%), and 9 months (35 vs. 22%) of aftercare. However, the groups did not differ on the majority of attendance measures and had similar abstinence rates at the 3-month (67% CPR vs. 71% STX), 6-month (52% CPR vs. 51% STX), and 12-month (the primary outcome measure; 48% CPR vs. 49% STX) follow-up points. Exploratory analyses suggest that CPR might be more effective among participants not required to attend aftercare. The incremental capital and labor cost of CPR compared to STX was $98.25 per participant.

Implementation of evidence-based substance use disorder continuing care interventions.

Continuing care following initial substance use disorder treatment often is associated with improved treatment outcomes and evidence-based interventions (EBIs) have been developed in this area. However, rates of patient participation in continuing care treatment and mutual help groups (MHGs) are low and a large gap exists between the existing EBIs and actual clinical care. This paper uses the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR; Damschroder et al., 2009) to review the literature on continuing care treatment and monitoring, and mutual help-group promotion. Although existing research provides implications for implementing EBIs in continuing care, few direct implementation trials have been conducted. This literature indicates that EBIs in continuing care have been successfully modified for different settings, that they can be delivered using different modalities (e.g., individual, group, and telephone-based care), and that low cost options are available. Additionally, much is known about the differential effectiveness of continuing care with different populations that may guide treatment programs and providers in selecting the most effective interventions for their clients. One significant barrier to successful implementation of EBIs for continuing care is the lack of information about incentives for providing continuing care across what in the CFIR terminology is a program's outer setting (i.e., external economic, political, and social setting), and its inner setting (i.e., internal political, structural, and cultural contexts). Implications for implementation of EBIs in substance use disorder continuing care are discussed.

The impact of contracting and prompting substance abuse treatment entry: a pilot trial.

Contracting and prompting clients to attend substance abuse treatment aftercare substantially improves treatment adherence and outcome. However, this approach has not been evaluated for improving entry into initial treatment. We recruited 102 individuals scheduled to begin a 28-day substance use disorder (SUD) residential treatment program and randomly assigned them to receive either our standard treatment (STX) or STX plus attendance contracting and prompting (CP). CP participants showed fewer subsequent hospitalization days, lower hospitalization costs, greater improvement in alcohol problem scores, and lower legal problem scores at a 3-month follow-up than the STX group. The two groups did not differ on treatment entry rate, time in treatment, or drug use problem scores. The clinical utility of CP procedures and areas for future research are discussed.