Providing Low-barrier Addiction Treatment Via a Telemedicine Consultation Service During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Los Angeles, County: An Assessment 1 Year Later.

BACKGROUND: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services provides medical care to a diverse group of patients residing in underresourced communities. To improve patients' access to addiction medications during the COVID-19 pandemic, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services established a low-barrier telephone service for DHS providers in March 2020, staffed by DATA-2000-waivered providers experienced with prescribing addiction medications. This study describes the patient population and medications prescribed through this service during its initial 12 months. METHODS: We performed a retrospective evaluation of a provider-entered call registry for the telephone consult line. Information was collected between March 31, 2020, and March 30, 2021. The registry includes information related to patient demographics, the reason for visit, and which addiction medications were prescribed. We conducted descriptive statistics in each of these domains. RESULTS: During the study period, 11 providers on the MAT telephone service logged 713 calls. These calls represented a total of 557 unique patients (mean age of 40 years, 75% male, 41% Latino, 49% experiencing homelessness). Most patients either had Medicaid insurance (77%) or were uninsured (20%). The most prescribed addiction medication was buprenorphine-naloxone (90%), followed by nicotine replacement therapy (5.3%), naltrexone (4.2%), and buprenorphine monotherapy (1.8%). CONCLUSION: A telephone addiction medication service is feasible to deliver low-barrier medications to treat addiction in underresourced communities, especially to individuals experiencing homelessness. This can mitigate but does not eliminate disparities in access to addiction medications for communities of color.

Value of family involvement in substance use disorder treatment: Aligning clinical and financing priorities.

BACKGROUND: Family members' support (e.g., informational, tangible, emotional) has important and lasting impacts on individuals' recovery from substance use disorders (SUDs). Unfortunately, SUD services in the United States do not consistently incorporate patients' family members effectively. One barrier to family involvement in SUD services is the mechanisms through which SUD services in the United States are commonly financed. METHOD: Using our recent experiences with developing a group intervention for support persons of patients with opioid use disorder, we illustrate how gaps in feasible financing models limit SUD service systems from effectively implementing and sustaining family services for individuals receiving SUD treatment. DISCUSSION: Long-term availability of family-inclusive interventions will require collaboration with payors and health systems. We offer two sets of recommendations for funding family involvement in SUD services; one set of immediately implementable recommendations and other longer-term goals requiring structural changes in SUD service delivery and financing.

Outcomes of two quality improvement implementation interventions for depression services in adults with substance use problems.

Background: Comorbid depression and substance use disorders (SUDs) are associated with poor health and social outcomes disproportionately affecting under-resourced communities.Objectives: To test the hypothesis that a coalition approach to collaborative care (CC) for depression would improve outcomes of hazardous drinking and behavioral health hospitalizations, relative to technical assistance, for individuals with comorbid substance use problems. Substance use problems were defined by meeting criteria for DSM-IV substance abuse or dependence, hazardous drinking by AUDIT-C, or treatment in a SUD program within the prior 6 months.Methods: Two depression CC implementation approaches were compared: Resources for Services (RS) provided expert technical support for CC toolkits to individual programs. Community engagement and planning (CEP) supported multi-sector coalitions in collaborating in planning, adapting, implementing and monitoring CC toolkits. One thousand eighteen individuals with depression (PHQ-8 ≥10) enrolled. Regression analyses estimated intervention effects in participants with comorbid substance use problems (n = 588, 281 females, 307 males). Substance use problems were defined by meeting criteria for DSM-IV substance abuse or dependence, hazardous drinking by AUDIT-C, or treatment in a SUD program within the prior 6 months.Results: There were no significant baseline differences by intervention status among participants with depression and substance use problems. Intervention effects on primary outcomes including depression were not significant at 6 months. Compared to RS, CEP significantly reduced alcohol consumption (CEP = 1.6, RS = 2.1, p = .038), probability of behavioral health hospitalizations (OR = 0.50, p = .036), and use of specialty mental health visits (IRR = 0.52, p = .027), while increasing use of faith-based depression services (IRR = 3.4, p = .001).Conclusions: Given feasibility and possible benefits, CEP should be considered a promising approach to implementing depression CC with potential benefits to adults with comorbid substance use problems.

The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act evaluation study: Impact on specialty behavioral healthcare utilization and spending among enrollees with substance use disorders.

BACKGROUND: The federal Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) sought to eliminate historical disparities between behavioral health and medical health insurance benefits among the commercially insured. This study determines whether MHPAEA was associated with increased BH expenditures and utilization among a population with substance use disorder (SUD) diagnoses. METHODS: Claims and eligibility data from 5,987,776 enrollees, 2008-2013, were obtained from a national, commercial, managed behavioral health organization. An interrupted time series study design with segmented regression analysis estimated time trends of per-member-per-month (PMPM) spending and use before (2008-2009), during (2010), and after (2011-2013) MHPAEA compliance. The study sample contained individuals with drug or alcohol use disorder diagnosis during study period (N=2,716,473 member-month observations). Outcomes included: total, plan, patient out-of-pocket spending; outpatient utilization (assessment/diagnostic evaluation visits; medication management; individual, group and family psychotherapy, and structured outpatient care); intermediate care utilization (day treatment; recovery home and residential); and inpatient utilization. RESULTS: Starting at the beginning of the post-parity period, MHPAEA was associated with increased levels of PMPM total and plan spending ($25.80 [p=0.01]; $28.33 [p=0.00], respectively), as well as the number of PMPM assessment/evaluation, individual psychotherapy, and group psychotherapy visits, and inpatient days (0.01 visits [p=0.01]; 0.02 visits [p=0.01]; 0.01 visits [p=0.03]; 0.01days [p=0.01], respectively). Following these initial level changes, MHPAEA was also associated with monthly increases in PMPM total, plan, and patent out-of-pocket spending ($2.56/month [p=0.00]; $2.25/month [p=0.00]; $0.27 [p=0.03], respectively), as well as structured outpatient visits and inpatient days (0.0012 visits/month [p=0.01]; 0.0012days/month [p=0.00]). CONCLUSION: MHPAEA was associated with modest increases in total, plan, and patient out-of-pocket spending and outpatient and inpatient utilization. These increases, while modest in magnitude, are larger in magnitude than increases detected among a sample of all enrollees (i.e. not only those with SUD diagnoses).

Organizing Publicly Funded Substance Use Disorder Treatment in the United States: Moving Toward a Service System Approach.

Historically, publicly funded substance use disorder (SUD) treatment services in the United States have been disorganized and inefficient. By reconfiguring and linking services to create systems of care-services, structures, and processes that are purposively interconnected to treat SUD systematically-health systems can transform discrete service components into cohesive service systems that comprehensively and efficiently treat SUDs. In this article we: (1) articulate the potential benefits of organizing publicly funded SUD services into systems of care; (2) review basic principles underlying theories of SUD system organization; (3) describe the mix and configuration of services needed to create comprehensive, integrated systems of publicly funded SUD care; (4) elucidate how patients can flow through systems of SUD services in a clinically sound and cost-efficient manner, and; (5) propose eight steps that can be taken to create systems of care by identifying and leveraging the strengths, assets, and capacities of SUD service providers already operating within their health care systems. In July 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced opportunities for states to redesign their Medicaid-funded SUD service systems. This paper provides considerations for SUD system design and development.

Hospital utilization for injection drug use-related soft tissue infections in urban versus rural counties in California.

Drug related-soft tissue infections (DR-STIs) are a significant source of hospital utilization in inner-city urban areas where injection drug use is common but the magnitude of hospital utilization for DR-STIs outside of inner-city urban areas is not known. We described the magnitude and characteristics of hospital utilization for DR-STIs in urban versus rural counties in California. All discharges from all nonfederal hospitals in California in 2000 with ICD-9 codes for a soft tissue infection and for drug dependence/abuse were abstracted from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development discharge database. There were 4,152 DR-STI discharges in 2000 from hospitals in 49 of California's 58 counties. Residents of 12 large metropolitan counties accounted for 3,598 discharges (87% of total). The majority of DR-STI discharges were from urban safety net hospitals with county indigent programs and Medicaid as the expected payment source and opiate related discharge diagnoses. Hospital utilization for DR-STIs in California is highest in large urban metropolitan counties, although DR-STI discharges are widespread. Increased access to harm reduction services and drug treatment may reduce government health care expenditures by preventing unnecessary hospital utilization for DR-STIs.