Naloxone Knowledge and Attitudes Towards Overdose Response Among Family Members of People who Misuse Opioids.

Providing family members of individuals with opioid use disorders (OUD) naloxone is a cost-effective way to prevent overdose deaths. However, misconceptions and negative attitudes towards naloxone hinder family engagement with naloxone programs. This study examines factors associated with knowledge and attitudes toward naloxone among adults with close family members who misused opioids. Adults with family members (parent, step-parent, child, spouse, sibling, or step-sibling) who misused opioids (N = 299) completed a web-based survey. Participants were recruited through treatment providers, community groups, and social media. Surveys assessed naloxone knowledge, attitudes toward overdose response, demographics, completion of naloxone training, attitude toward medications for OUD, and family members' overdose history. Multiple regression was used to identify factors associated with naloxone knowledge (Model 1) and attitudes toward overdose response (Model 2). A graduate degree (B = .35, p < .003) and a history of overdose (B = 0.21, p = .032) were associated with greater naloxone knowledge. Age (B = .11, p < .001), race/ethnicity (B = -1.39, p = .037), naloxone training (B = 2.70, p < .001), and more positive attitude toward medications for OUD (B = 1.50, p = .003) were associated with attitudes toward overdose response. Family members are potential allies in reducing drug overdose deaths, and families may need broader education about naloxone. Awareness of previous overdose was associated with greater naloxone knowledge. Findings related to race/ethnicity suggest the need to reach family members of minoritized racial groups to provide access to naloxone training. Findings point to where education and distribution efforts may focus on increasing knowledge and improving attitudes among those closest to people with OUD.

Stigma Communication Surrounding Nonmedical Opioid Use Among Affected Family Members.

A growing body of research demonstrates the role of language in stigma toward nonmedical opioid use (NMOU). Terms like "substance abuser" perpetuate stereotypes and evoke punitive judgments. This study examines how affected family members (AFMs) communicate stigma when discussing their loved one's NMOU. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 adults with a close family member with a history of NMOU. An iterative approach was used to analyze instances when stigmatizing terms or messages were used. AFMs described people engaged in NMOU as underweight, "dirty," or "nodding off," and often labeled these individuals "addicts" or opioid "abusers." Responsibility for the NMOU was attributed to both internal (e.g. choice) and external (e.g. brain disease) factors. People engaged in NMOU were linked to physical danger, resource threats, and threats to the family members' reputation and relationships. While most stigma messages related to the person engaged in NMOU, stigmatizing messages directed toward AFMs also emerged; family members labeled "enablers" were judged, blamed, and described as a threat to the person engaged in NMOU. Although AFMs expressed care and desire to support their loved ones, they often conveyed stigma in their language choices. This language among AFMs may reflect internalized stigma. Increased efforts are needed to help AFMs cope with the challenges of a loved one's NMOU and identify effective ways to support their loved one. One way AFMs can support their loved one is by using more inclusive, person-first language.

Attitudes toward medications for opioid use disorder among peer recovery specialists.

Background: Peer recovery specialists (PRSs) are substance use service providers with lived experience in recovery. Although a large body of research demonstrates the efficacy of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), emerging research suggests PRSs' attitudes toward MOUD are ambivalent or mixed. Few studies have quantitatively assessed factors influencing PRSs' attitudes.Objectives: This study identifies personal and professional characteristics associated with attitudes toward MOUD among PRSs.Methods: PRSs working at publicly funded agencies in Michigan completed a self-administered web-based survey (N = 266, 60.5% women). Surveys assessed socio-demographics, treatment and recovery history, attitudes toward clients, and attitudes toward MOUD. Multiple linear regression was used to identify factors associated with attitudes toward MOUD.Results: A minority of PRSs (21.4%) reported a history of treatment with MOUD, while nearly two-thirds reported current 12-step involvement (62.5%). Compared to PRSs without a history of MOUD treatment, PRSs who had positive (b = 4.71, p < .001) and mixed (b = 3.36, p = .010) experiences with MOUD had more positive attitudes; PRSs with negative experiences with MOUD had less positive attitudes (b = -3.16, p = .003). Current 12-step involvement (b = -1.63, p = .007) and more stigmatizing attitudes toward clients (b = -.294, p < .001) were associated with less positive attitudes toward MOUD. Black PRSs had less positive attitudes than White PRSs (b = -2.50, p = .001), and women had more positive attitudes than men (b = 1.19, p = .038).Conclusion: PRSs' attitudes toward MOUD varied based on the nature of their lived experience. Findings highlight considerations for training and supervising PRSs who serve individuals with opioid use disorder.

Public Perceptions of Opioid Use for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain.

Background: Chronic non-cancer pain affects 20% of Americans. This is significantly impacted by the ongoing opioid crisis and reduced opioid dispensing. Public perceptions additionally shape pain management strategies. Purpose: This study explores public attitudes toward prescription opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. We aim to understand how public attitudes are influenced by the evolving opioid crisis and shifting opioid use patterns. Methods: In Michigan, 823 adults participated in a Qualtrics survey on attitudes toward nonmedical and medical prescription opioid use. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with beliefs that doctors prescribe opioids for too long (Model 1) and chronic pain patients should transition to alternative treatments (Model 2). Results: About half (49.4%) of respondents believed doctors keep patients on prescription opioids for too long, while two-thirds (65.7%) agreed chronic pain patients should be tapered off medications. Knowing someone who misused opioids and perceptions of substance use (e.g. perceived risk of prescription opioid misuse, stigma toward chronic pain patients, perceived prevalence of prescription opioid misuse, and awareness of fentanyl) were associated with greater odds of believing doctors keep patients on opioids too long. Demographics (age and education), substance use histories and perceptions (e.g. perceived risk and stigma) were associated with greater odds of believing patients should be tapered off their medication. Conclusions: These findings inform strategies to correct public misperceptions, emphasizing the importance of personal experience, perceived risks, and stigmatization of chronic pain patients. This insight can guide effective pain management for those with chronic non-cancer pain.

Attitudes toward Medication for Opioid Use Disorder among Substance Use Treatment Providers.

Background: Provider attitudes can be a powerful reinforcer of stigma toward medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study examines attitudes toward MOUD among substance use treatment providers and identifies personal and professional characteristics associated with more positive attitudes. Methods: Treatment providers (N = 570) working at publicly-funded substance use programs in Michigan self-administered a web-based survey (November 2020 through July 2021), reporting their socio-demographics, professional experience, and attitudes toward MOUD. Linear regression was used to identify factors associated with general attitudes toward MOUD and three logistic regression models were calculated to identify factors associated with perceptions of each medication. Results: Half of providers considered methadone an effective treatment (53.0%); 62.9% considered buprenorphine effective, and 70.3% considered naltrexone effective. Receipt of training (B = 1.433, p = .009) and serving pregnant women or women with children (B = 1.662, p < .001) were associated with more positive attitudes toward MOUD. Providers with advanced degrees were more likely to consider methadone (OR = 2.264, p = .006), buprenorphine (OR = 2.192, p = .009), and naltrexone (OR = 2.310, p = .011) effective. Rural providers were more likely to consider naltrexone effective (OR = 2.708, p = .003). Providers working with criminal legal populations were more likely to consider buprenorphine (OR = 2.948, p = .041) and naltrexone (OR = 4.108, p = .010) effective, but not methadone. Conclusion: Treatment providers' attitudes remain poorly aligned with the evidence base. Increased efforts are needed to address attitudes toward MOUD among the specialized treatment workforce.

Predictors of Safe Prescription Opioid Storage and Participation in Drug Take-Back Events: Results from a Statewide Survey.

Improper storage and disposal of prescribed opioids can lead to diversion or accidental poisonings. Studies of emergency department and cancer patients suggest prescription opioids are rarely stored securely or disposed of when unneeded. Safe storage and disposal practices reduce risks for others living in or visiting a household. The purpose of this study is thus to examine prescription opioid storage and participation in drug take-back events among Michigan adults. Participants (N = 702) were recruited through social media advertisements to complete an online survey in July and August 2018. Logistic regression was used to examine correlates of safe storage and disposal. 8.4% (n = 59) of participants reported always keeping opioids locked; 29.8% (n = 209) reported attending a drug take-back event. Black participants and those who believed that illegal drug use was a serious problem had greater odds of locking opioids; participants with higher levels of education or who knew someone who used heroin or misused prescription opioids had lesser odds of locking opioids. Age and race were associated with take-back event participation. Findings identify factors associated with safe prescription opioid storage/disposal and indicate safe storage/disposal seldom occurs. Education and provision of safe storage equipment should be designed for diverse ages, races/ethnicities, and levels of education. Drug take-back events not hosted by law enforcement may have broader appeal, as may those led by Black or other people of color. Wider use of drug donation boxes may facilitate increased disposal among those who do not wish to or cannot attend take-back events.

Adolescent Use, Diversion Sources, and Perceived Procurement Difficulty of Prescription Medications.

This study examines trends in medical use, nonmedical use, diversion sources, and perceived procurement difficulty of prescription medications for nonmedical use among US adolescents.

Support for Safe Consumption Sites Among Peer Recovery Coaches.

Safe consumption sites (SCSs), legally sanctioned facilities where people can use drugs under medical supervision, are an effective strategy to reduce overdose fatalities. Peer recovery coaches (PRCs), substance use service providers with lived experience in recovery, are a key provider group affecting SCS implementation. This study assesses support for SCSs among PRCs and identifies personal and professional characteristics associated with support for these sites. PRCs (N = 260) in Michigan were recruited to complete a web-based survey (July-September 2021), reporting their demographics, lived experience, abstinence orientation, attitudes toward clients, training experiences, and support for legalizing SCSs. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with support for SCSs. Half of PRCs (49.0%) expressed support for legalizing SCSs in Michigan. Compared to women, men had greater odds of supporting SCSs (OR = 2.113, p = .014). PRCs who identified as Black (OR = 0.361, p = .014) and other people of color (OR = 0.338, p = .014) had lower odds of supporting SCSs compared to PRCs who identified as white. More stigmatizing attitudes toward clients (OR = 0.921, p = .022) and preference for abstinence-only treatment (OR = 0.452, p = .013) were associated with lower odds of supporting SCSs. Increasing support for SCSs among PRCs is important given their influence on the success of SCS initiatives. Professional training which addresses deeply rooted values and beliefs may help increase support for SCSs. However, policy changes may be necessary to address structural racism affecting SCS acceptability among PRCs of color.

The substance use disorder treatment gap among US college students: Findings from the 2021 National Survey on Drug Use and Health.

Background: Substance use and substance use disorders (SUD) are prevalent among college students. Information about the gap between substance use treatment need versus treatment receipt can guide efforts to increase service access. This study examined past-year DSM-5 SUD and receipt of treatment among US college students. Methods: Past-year DSM-5 SUD and treatment receipt were estimated among a sample of 6115 college students aged 16 and older and a comparison group of non-students from the 2021 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, weighted to be nationally representative. Among the college student sample, multiple logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with past-year SUD. Bivariate analyses were used to compare socio-demographic and substance use differences between college students who received treatment and those who had an SUD but did not receive treatment. Results: Weighted prevalence of past-year SUD among college students was 21.8 %. Only 4.6 % of students who had an SUD received treatment in any setting. Relative to non-students with SUD, proportionately fewer college students with SUD received treatment. Among college students, age, sex, past-year psychological distress, and past-year substance use were significantly associated with past-year SUD; and receipt of treatment differed significantly by age, insurance type, level of education, and enrollment status. College students who received treatment had greater prevalence of stimulant, opioid, tranquilizer, and poly-SUDs and more severe SUD symptomology than those who did not receive treatment. Conclusion: Additional efforts are needed to engage college students with SUDs in acceptable, evidence-based treatment services.

Adolescents' Use of Medications for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Subsequent Risk of Nonmedical Stimulant Use.

PURPOSE: This national prospective multicohort study examined the relationship between US adolescents' use of stimulant therapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and subsequent risk of nonmedical stimulant use (i.e., nonmedical use of prescription stimulants and cocaine use) during young adulthood, relative to nonstimulant therapy and population controls. METHODS: Nationally representative multicohort panels of 11,905 US 12th-grade students were surveyed via self-administered questionnaires at baseline (age 18) and followed prospectively over six years into young adulthood (ages 19‒24). RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between adolescents who used stimulant therapy for ADHD compared to those who used only nonstimulant medications and population controls in their adjusted odds of nonmedical stimulant use incidence or prevalence during young adulthood, after adjusting for baseline covariates. DISCUSSION: The findings offer preliminary support that adolescents who use prescription stimulant or nonstimulant medications for ADHD when clinically indicated are not at greater risk for nonmedical stimulant use during young adulthood.

Beyond the 5-year recovery mark: Perspectives of researchers with lived and living experience on public engagement and discourse.

There has been growing attention toward including people with lived and living experience (PWLLE) with substance use, substance use disorders, and recovery in public-facing activities. The goals of including PWLLE in sharing their perspectives often include demonstrating that recovery is possible, destigmatizing and humanizing people who have substance use experiences, and leveraging their lived experience to illuminate a particular topic or issue. Recently, the National Council for Mental Wellbeing issued a set of guidelines entitled, "Protecting Individuals with Lived Experience in Public Disclosure," which included a "Lived Experience Safeguard Scale." We offer the present commentary to bolster some of the ideas presented by the Council and to articulate suggested changes to this guidance, with the goal of reducing unintentional gatekeeping and stigma. Specifically, we offer that there are numerous problems with the recommendation to only invite people who have "five or more years of sustained recovery" to contribute to public discourse. The idea of perceived stability after five years of abstinence is not new to us or the field. We suggest that this idea excludes people who have experienced the present rapidly changing substance use landscape, people who have briefly returned to use, some young people, and people with living experience who also can valuably contribute to public discourse. We offer alternative guidelines to the National Council for Mental Wellbeing and others seeking to promote practices that are inclusive to the diversity of PWLLE.

Experiences of healthcare and substance use treatment provider-based stigma among patients receiving methadone.

Background: Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) are efficacious, however only one-third of individuals with an opioid use disorder (OUD) enter into treatment. Low rates of MOUD utilization are partially due to stigma. This study examines provider-based stigma toward MOUD and identifies factors associated with experiencing stigma related to MOUD from substance use treatment and healthcare providers among people receiving methadone. Methods: Clients receiving MOUD at an opioid treatment program (N = 247) were recruited to complete a cross-sectional computer-based survey assessing socio-demographics, substance use, depression and anxiety symptoms, self-stigma, and recovery supports/barriers. Logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with hearing negative comments about MOUD from substance use treatment and healthcare providers. Results: 27.9% and 56.7% of respondents reported they sometimes/often hear negative comments about MOUD from substance use treatment and healthcare providers, respectively. Logistic regression results indicate that individuals who experience more negative consequences resulting from their OUD (OR=1.09, p=.019) had greater odds of hearing negative comments from substance use treatment providers. Age (OR=0.966, p=.017) and treatment stigma (OR=1.42, p=.030) were associated with greater odds of hearing negative comments from healthcare providers. Conclusions: Stigma can be a deterrent to seeking substance use treatment, healthcare, and recovery support. Understanding factors associated with experiencing stigma from substance use treatment providers and healthcare providers is important as these individuals may act as advocates for those with OUD. This study highlights individual factors associated with hearing negative comments about methadone and other MOUD and point to areas for targeted education.

Ambivalence and contingencies: A qualitative examination of peer recovery coaches' attitudes toward medications for opioid use disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Peer recovery coaches (PRCs) are an important provider group affecting medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) uptake and retention. However, some PRCs may have experiences and beliefs that do not align with the use of MOUD. This study examines PRCs' perceptions of MOUD and how PRCs' attitudes affect their interactions with clients. The article also explores factors influencing PRCs' attitudes. METHODS: The study team conducted semi-structured interviews by phone with PRCs in Michigan (N = 34, July through September 2021). The study asked participants about their opinion of MOUD, how they help clients to make decisions about MOUD, and whether they have encountered negative attitudes toward MOUD in their work. Data analysis was guided by Tracy's (2020) iterative phronetic approach. RESULTS: Nearly all PRCs acknowledged the social stigma surrounding MOUD. PRCs described the stigma toward MOUD as affecting treatment access, utilization, and recovery support. While most PRCs expressed support for many recovery pathways, support for MOUD was contingent on the type of medication and the conditions under which it is used. PRCs often described MOUD as acceptable only in the short-term when paired with psychosocial interventions, after nonpharmacological treatment attempts had failed. PRCs with concerns about MOUD reported sometimes avoiding discussions about MOUD with clients, spreading misinformation about MOUD, and encouraging clients to discontinue treatment. However, many PRCs expressed a desire to support clients' self-determination despite their own biases. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight a need for education and stigma reduction among PRCs and point to specific areas for intervention. PRCs described deeply engrained beliefs about MOUD rooted in their own treatment histories and recovery practices. Provision of high-quality training and supervision to shift attitudes among PRCs will be key to increasing the use of MOUD.

Comorbid Affective and Substance Use Disorders of Medicaid/Medicare Beneficiaries at an Opioid Treatment Program Serving Small Urban and Rural Communities.

Objectives: Identify rates and correlates of comorbid affective and substance use disorders among an understudied population, Medicaid/Medicare beneficiaries receiving care at an opioid treatment program serving patients from small urban and rural areas. Examine whether past-year non-medical opioid use status differentiates comorbidity status. Methods: A cross-sectional, venue-based design was used to recruit a convenience sample of patients treated with methadone for opioid use disorder. Measures were assessed across three domains: (1) demographic characteristics, (2) opioid use characteristics, and (3) comorbid disorders. Brief validated screeners categorized probable comorbid disorders. Bivariate analyses examined correlates of comorbid disorders and determined variable selection for multivariable analyses. Results: In this sample (N = 210; mean age = 38.5 years; female = 62.2%; Non-Hispanic White race/ethnicity = 86.1%), comorbid disorders were common. Rates were as follows: current anxiety (48.1%), depression (41.1%), and PTSD (33.7%), and past-year stimulant (27.6%), marijuana (19.0%), alcohol (14.9%), and sedative (7.6%). In bivariate analyses, past-year non-medical opioid use and a greater accumulation of opioid use consequences were associated with most disorders. When including demographic and opioid use characteristics in multivariable analyses, past-year non-medical opioid use was associated with anxiety, PTSD, stimulant use disorder, and sedative use disorder. Conclusions: Few studies have investigated comorbid disorders among this understudied population. This analysis highlights a high burden, especially for affective disorders. Our findings demonstrate that routine, ongoing assessment of non-medical opioid use may be a promising and feasible strategy to detect patients needing integrated care. Future research should investigate whether changes to assessment protocols at opioid treatment programs in small urban and rural settings facilitate care coordination.

An examination of correlates of simultaneous opioid and benzodiazepine use among patients in medication treatment for opioid use disorder in a small midwestern community.

Background: Concurrent and/or simultaneous use of opioids and benzodiazepines has been associated with increased risk of accident and injury, as well as with co-occurring psychopathology. Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to explore potential correlates of simultaneous opioid and benzodiazepine use in a small community, including perceived risk, positive screens for psychiatric symptoms, and opioid-related consequences. Methods: A sample of 267 participants were recruited from a medication treatment provider that serves a small Midwestern community. Multinomial logistic regression was used to explore demographic and mental health correlates associated with self-reports of past-year simultaneous use. Zero-inflated Poisson regression was used to explore past-year consequences associated with reported simultaneous benzodiazepine and opioid use. Results: Intentional simultaneous use of opioids and benzodiazepines was associated with greater anxiety and depression symptoms, greater likelihood of a positive PTSD screen, and low self-perceived risk of simultaneous use. Individuals reporting opioid/benzodiazepine simultaneous use were also more likely to report opioid-related consequences. Conclusions: Results highlight the importance of assessing and treating simultaneous opioid/benzodiazepine co-use, as well as relevant comorbidities.

Cumulative barriers to retention in methadone treatment among adults from rural and small urban communities.

BACKGROUND: Though methadone has been shown to effectively treat opioid use disorder, many barriers prevent individuals from accessing and maintaining treatment. Barriers are prevalent in less populated areas where treatment options are limited. This study examines barriers to retention in methadone treatment in a small Midwest community and identifies factors associated with greater endorsement of barriers. METHODS: Patients at an opioid treatment program (N = 267) were recruited to complete a computer-based survey onsite. Surveys assessed demographics, opioid misuse, depression and anxiety symptoms, trauma history and symptoms, social support, and barriers to retention in treatment (e.g., childcare, work, housing, transportation, legal obligations, cost, health). Descriptive statistics were used to examine individual barriers and multiple regression was calculated to identify demographic and psychosocial factors associated with greater cumulative barriers. RESULTS: Most participants reported at least one barrier to retention in treatment and more than half reported multiple barriers. Travel hardships and work conflicts were the most highly endorsed barriers. Past year return to use (B = 2.31, p = 0.004) and more severe mental health symptomology (B = 0.20, p = 0.038) were associated with greater cumulative barriers. Greater levels of social support were associated with fewer barriers (B = - 0.23, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study adds to the limited research on barriers to retention in methadone treatment among patients in rural and small urban communities. Findings suggest flexible regulations for dispensing methadone, co-location or care coordination, and family or peer support programs may further reduce opioid use and related harms in small communities. Individuals with past year return to use reported a greater number of barriers, highlighting the time following return to use as critical for wraparound services and support. Those with co-occurring mental health issues may be vulnerable to poor treatment outcomes, as evidenced by greater endorsement of barriers. As social support emerged as a protective factor, efforts to strengthen informal support networks should be explored as adjunctive services to methadone treatment.

Evaluating the implementation of a prisoner re-entry initiative for individuals with opioid use and mental health disorders: Application of the consolidated framework for implementation research in a cross-system initiative.

Given the interrelated nature of opioid use, criminal justice interaction, and mental health issues, the current opioid crisis has created an urgent need for treatment, including medication assisted treatment, among justice-involved populations. Implementation research plays an important role in improving systems of care and integration of evidence-based practices within and outside of criminal justice institutions. The current study is a formative qualitative evaluation of the implementation of a cross-system (corrections and community-based) opioid use treatment initiative supported by Opioid State Targeted Response (STR) funding. The purpose of the study is to assess the fit of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to a cross-system initiative, and to identify key barriers and facilitators to implementation. The process evaluation showed that adaptability of the clinical model and staff flexibility were critical to implementation. Cultural and procedural differences across correctional facilities and community-based treatment programs required frequent and structured forums for cross-system communication. Challenges related to recruitment and enrollment, staffing, MAT, and data collection were addressed through the collaborative development and continuous review of policies and procedures. This study found CFIR to be a useful framework for understanding implementation uptake and barriers. The framework was particularly valuable in reinforcing the use of implementation research as a means for continuous process improvement. CFIR is a comprehensive and flexible framework that may be adopted in future cross-system evaluations.