Envisioning Minimally Disruptive Opioid Use Disorder Care.

Most people who need and want treatment for opioid addiction cannot access it. Among those who do get treatment, only a fraction receive evidence-based, life-saving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). MOUD access is not simply a matter of needing more clinicians or expanding existing treatment capacity. Instead, many facets of our health systems and policies create unwarranted, inflexible, and punitive practices that create life-threatening barriers to care. In the USA, opioid use disorder care is maximally disruptive. Minimally disruptive medicine (MDM) is a framework that focuses on achieving patient goals while imposing the smallest possible burden on patients' lives. Using MDM framing, we highlight how current medical practices and policies worsen the burden of treatment and illness, compound life demands, and strain resources. We then offer suggestions for programmatic and policy changes that would reduce disruption to the lives of those seeking care, improve health care quality and delivery, begin to address disparities and inequities, and save lives.

A Taxonomy of Hospital-Based Addiction Care Models: a Scoping Review and Key Informant Interviews.

BACKGROUND: There is pressing need to improve hospital-based addiction care. Various models for integrating substance use disorder care into hospital settings exist, but there is no framework for describing, selecting, or comparing models. We sought to fill that gap by constructing a taxonomy of hospital-based addiction care models based on scoping literature review and key informant interviews. METHODS: Methods included a scoping review of the literature on US hospital-based addiction care models and interventions for adults, published between January 2000 and July 2021. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 key informants experienced in leading, implementing, evaluating, andpracticing hospital-based addiction care to explore model characteristics, including their perceived strengths, limitations, and implementation considerations. We synthesized findings from the literature review and interviews to construct a taxonomy of model types. RESULTS: Searches identified 2,849 unique abstracts. Of these, we reviewed 280 full text articles, of which 76 were included in the final review. We added 8 references from reference lists and informant interviews, and 4 gray literature sources. We identified six distinct hospital-based addiction care models. Those classified as addiction consult models include (1) interprofessional addiction consult services, (2) psychiatry consult liaison services, and (3) individual consultant models. Those classified as practice-based models, wherein general hospital staff integrate addiction care into usual practice, include (4) hospital-based opioid treatment and (5) hospital-based alcohol treatment. The final type was (6) community-based in-reach, wherein community providers deliver care. Models vary in their target patient population, staffing, and core clinical and systems change activities. Limitations include that some models have overlapping characteristics and variable ways of delivering core components. DISCUSSION: A taxonomy provides hospital clinicians and administrators, researchers, and policy-makers with a framework to describe, compare, and select models for implementing hospital-based addiction care and measure outcomes.

Expanding the Team: Optimizing the Multidisciplinary Management of Drug Use-Associated Infective Endocarditis.

Amidst a substance use epidemic, hospitalizations and valve surgeries related to drug use-associated infective endocarditis (DU-IE) rose substantially in the last decade. Rates of reoperation and mortality remain high, yet in many hospitals patients are not offered valve surgery or evidence-based addiction treatment. A multidisciplinary team approach can improve outcomes in patients with infective endocarditis; however, the breadth of expertise that should be incorporated into this team is inadequately conceptualized. It is our opinion that incorporating addiction medicine services into the team may improve outcomes in DU-IE. Here, we describe our experience incorporating addiction medicine services into the multidisciplinary management of DU-IE and share implications for other hospitals and health systems looking to improve care for people with DU-IE.

Perioperative Management of Buprenorphine/Naloxone in a Large, National Health Care System: a Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Medication for opioid use disorder, including buprenorphine and methadone, is considered the gold standard treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). As the number of patients receiving buprenorphine has grown, clinicians increasingly care for patients prescribed buprenorphine who present for surgery and require management of perioperative pain. OBJECTIVE: To describe practice patterns of perioperative and post-surgical use of buprenorphine among patients prescribed buprenorphine for OUD who experience major surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study utilizing data from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW), a national repository of patient-level data. Data not accessible in CDW, including clinical instructions to patients to modify buprenorphine dose, were accessed via chart review. PARTICIPANTS: National sample of patients receiving care through the Veterans Health Administration. MAIN MEASURES: We report descriptive statistics on the incidence of buprenorphine dose hold prior to, during, and immediately following surgery, as well as post-surgical outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression identified socio-demographic and clinical characteristics associated with perioperative hold. KEY RESULTS: Our final sample comprised 183 patients, the majority of whom were white and male. Most patients (66%) experienced a perioperative buprenorphine dose hold: during the pre-operative, day of surgery, and post-operative periods, 40%, 62%, and 55% of patients had buprenorphine held. Buprenorphine dose hold was less likely for patients who had experienced homelessness/housing insecurity in the year prior to surgery (aOR = 0.25; 95% CI 0.10-0.61) as well as patients residing in rural areas (aOR=0.29; 0.12-0.68). Within the 12-month period following surgery, 122 patients (67%) were retained on buprenorphine, 10 patients (5.5%) had experienced an overdose, and 15 (8.2%) had died. CONCLUSIONS: We identified high rates of perioperative buprenorphine dose holds. As holding buprenorphine perioperatively does not align with emerging clinical recommendations and carries significant risks, educational campaigns or other provider-targeted interventions may be needed to ensure patients with OUD receive recommended care.

Collaboration in a time of crisis: Adapting a telementoring ECHO for addiction leaders during COVID-19.

Substance use disorder (SUD) organizations are often siloed, with little integration across specialty addictions treatment, primary care and hospitals, harm reduction, policy, and advocacy. COVID-19 introduced a pressing need for collaboration and leadership, given a fast-changing, high-stakes environment; widespread anxiety; and lack of guidance. This research letter describes our approach to convening and supporting leaders across the US state of Oregon's SUD continuum during the pandemic. We rapidly developed and implemented a SUD COVID Response ECHO, adapting ECHO - a telementoring model - to convene leaders across 32 statewide agencies. Our experience allowed participants to lead their agencies to respond to real-time COVID-related needs, address existing barriers within SUD systems, and build relationships and community across statewide SUD leaders. This kind of collaboration - which helped bridge gaps among the diverse agencies, disciplines, and regions addressing SUDs in the state - was long overdue, and sows seeds for long-term advances in care for people with SUD.

Differences in the delivery of medications for opioid use disorder during hospitalization by racial categories: A retrospective cohort analysis.

Background: As the drug-related overdose crisis and COVID-19 pandemic continue, communities need increased access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) (i.e., buprenorphine and methadone). Disparities in the type of MOUD prescribed or administered by racial and ethnic categories are well described in the outpatient clinical environment. It is unknown, however, if these disparities persist when MOUD is provided in acute care hospitals. Methods: This study assessed differences in the delivery of buprenorphine versus methadone during acute medical or surgical hospitalizations for veterans with opioid use disorder (OUD) by racial categories (Black Non-Hispanic or Latino vs. White Non-Hispanic or Latino). Data were obtained retrospectively from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) for federal fiscal year 2017. We built logistic regression models, adjusted for individual and hospital-related covariates, and calculated the predicted probabilities of MOUD delivery by racial categories. Results: The study cohort (n = 1,313 unique patients; N = 107 VHA hospitals) had a mean age of 57 (range 23 to 87 years), was predominantly male (96%), and composed entirely of Black (29%) or White (71%) patients. White patients were 11% more likely than Black patients to receive buprenorphine than methadone during hospitalization (p = 0.010; 95% CI: 2.7%, 20.0%). Among patients on MOUD prior to hospitalization, White patients were 21% more likely than Black patients to receive buprenorphine (p = 0.000; 95% CI: 9.8%, 31.5%). Among patients newly initiated on MOUD during hospitalization, there were no differences by racial categories. Conclusion: We observed disparities in the delivery of buprenorphine versus methadone during hospitalization by racial categories. The observed differences in hospital-based MOUD delivery may be influenced by MOUD received prior to hospitalization within the racialized outpatient addiction treatment system. The VHA and health systems more broadly must address all aspects of racism that contribute to inequitable MOUD access throughout all clinical contexts.

Exploring how hospitalization can alter hepatitis c virus treatment prioritization and trajectories in people who use drugs: A qualitative analysis.

Background: People who use drugs (PWUD) have high rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Hospitalization can be a time for PWUD to engage in addiction treatment, but little is known about how hospitalization shapes HCV treatment readiness. We aimed to describe how hospitalization and addiction medicine consult service (AMCS) can alter HCV prioritization of inpatient PWUD with HCV. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study consisting of semi-structured interviews (n = 27) of hospitalized adults with addiction and HCV infection seen by an AMCS at a single, urban, academic center. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded iteratively at the semantic level, and analyzed for themes. Results: Of the 27 participants, most identified as Caucasian (85%), male gender (67%), and they primarily used opioids (78%); approximately half (48%) reported HCV diagnosis over 5 years ago. We identified three main themes around hospitalization altering the prioritizations and HCV treatment preferences for PWUD: (1) HCV treatment non-engaged (2) HCV treatment urgency, and (3) HCV treatment in the future. Those wanting to treat HCV-whether urgently or in the future-shared the overlapping theme of hospitalization as a reachable moment for their addiction and HCV. These participants recognized the long-term benefits of addressing HCV and connected their hospitalization to substance use. Conclusion: In our study, PWUD with HCV expressed varying and competing priorities and life circumstances contributing to three main HCV treatment trajectories. Our results suggest ways hospitalization can serve as an HCV touchpoint for PWUD, especially in the context of addressing substance use, and could be used when designing and implementing targeted interventions to improve the HCV care continuum for PWUD.

Long-term Infective Endocarditis Mortality Associated With Injection Opioid Use in the United States: A Modeling Study.

BACKGROUND: The expansion of the US opioid epidemic has led to significant increases in infections, such as infective endocarditis (IE), which is tied to injection behaviors. We aimed to estimate the population-level IE mortality rate among people who inject opioids and compare the risk of IE death against the risks of death from other causes. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model of the natural history of injection opioid use. We defined injection behavior profiles by both injection frequency and injection techniques. We accounted for competing risks of death and populated the model with primary and published data. We modeled cohorts of 1 million individuals with different injection behavior profiles until age 60 years. We combined model-generated estimates with published data to project the total expected number of IE deaths in the United States by 2030. RESULTS: The probabilities of death from IE by age 60 years for 20-, 30-, and 40-year-old men with high-frequency use with higher infection risk techniques compared to lower risk techniques for IE were 53.8% versus 3.7%, 51.4% versus 3.1%, and 44.5% versus 2.2%, respectively. The predicted population-level attributable fraction of 10-year mortality from IE among all risk groups was 20%. We estimated that approximately 257 800 people are expected to die from IE by 2030. CONCLUSIONS: The expected burden of IE among people who inject opioids in the United States is large. Adopting a harm reduction approach, including through expansion of syringe service programs, to address injection behaviors could have a major impact on decreasing the mortality rate associated with the opioid epidemic.

Spreading Addictions Care Across Oregon's Rural and Community Hospitals: Mixed-Methods Evaluation of an Interprofessional Telementoring ECHO Program.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of effectiveness, most US hospitals do not deliver hospital-based addictions care. ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) is a telementoring model for providers across diverse geographic areas. We developed and implemented a substance use disorder (SUD) in hospital care ECHO to support statewide dissemination of best practices in hospital-based addictions care. OBJECTIVES: Assess the feasibility, acceptability, and effects of ECHO and explore lessons learned and implications for the spread of hospital-based addictions care. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study with a pre-/post-intervention design. PARTICIPANTS: Interprofessional hospital providers and administrators across Oregon. INTERVENTION: A 10-12-week ECHO that included participant case presentations and brief didactics delivered by an interprofessional faculty, including peers with lived experience in recovery. APPROACH: To assess feasibility and acceptability, we collected enrollment, attendance, and participant feedback data. To evaluate ECHO effects, we used pre-/post-ECHO assessments and performed a thematic analysis of open-ended survey responses and participant focus groups. KEY RESULTS: We recruited 143 registrants to three cohorts between January and September 2019, drawing from 32 of Oregon's 62 hospitals and one southwest Washington hospital. Ninety-six (67.1%) attended at least half of ECHO sessions. Participants were highly satisfied with ECHO. After ECHO, participants were more prepared to treat SUD; however, prescribing did not change. Participants identified substantial gains in knowledge and skills, particularly regarding the use of medications for opioid use disorder; patient-centered communication with people who use drugs; and understanding harm reduction as a valid treatment approach. ECHO built a community of practice and reduced provider isolation. Participants recognized the need for supportive hospital leadership, policies, and SUD resources to fully implement and adopt hospital-based SUD care. CONCLUSIONS: A statewide, interprofessional SUD hospital care ECHO was feasible and acceptable. Findings may be useful to health systems, states, and regions looking to expand hospital-based addictions care.

"OPTIONS-DC", a feasible discharge planning conference to expand infection treatment options for people with substance use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Serious bacterial infections associated with substance use often result in long hospitalizations, premature discharges, and high costs. Out-of-hospital treatment options in people with substance use disorder (SUD) are often limited. METHODS: We describe a novel multidisciplinary and interprofessional care conference, "OPTIONS-DC," to identify treatment options agreeable to both patients and providers using the frameworks of harm reduction and patient-centered care. We retrospectively reviewed charts of patients who had an OPTIONS-DC between February 2018 and July 2019 and used content analysis to understand the conferences' effects on antibiotic treatment options. RESULTS: Fifty patients had an OPTIONS-DC during the study window. Forty-two (84%) had some intravenous (IV) substance use and 44 (88%) had an active substance use disorder. Participants' primary substances included opioids (65%) or methamphetamines (28%). On average, conferences lasted 28 min. OPTIONS-DC providers recommended out-of-hospital antibiotic treatment options for 34 (68%) of patients. OPTIONS-DC recommended first line therapy of IV antibiotics for 35 (70%) patients, long-acting injectable antibiotics for 14 (28%), and oral therapy for 1 (2%). 35 (70%) patients that had an OPTIONS-DC completed an antibiotic course and 6 (12%) left the hospital prematurely. OPTIONS-DC expanded treatment options by exposing and contextualizing SUD, psychosocial risk and protective factors; incorporating patient preferences; and allowing providers to tailor antibiotic and SUD recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: OPTIONS-DC is a feasible intervention that allows providers to integrate principles of harm reduction and offer patient-centered choices among patients needing prolonged antibiotic treatment.

Opioid Agonist Therapy During Hospitalization Within the Veterans Health Administration: a Pragmatic Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalization of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) is increasing, yet little is known about opioid agonist therapy (OAT: methadone and buprenorphine) administration during admission. OBJECTIVE: Describe and examine patient- and hospital-level characteristics associated with OAT receipt during hospitalization in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 12,407 unique patients, ≥ 18 years old, with an OUD-related ICD-10 diagnosis within 12 months prior to or during index hospitalization in fiscal year 2017 from 109 VHA hospitals in the continental U.S. MAIN MEASURE: OAT received during hospitalization. KEY RESULTS: Few admissions received OAT (n = 1914; 15%) and when provided it was most often for withdrawal management (n = 834; 7%). Among patients not on OAT prior to admission who survived hospitalization (n = 10,969), 2.0% (n = 203) were newly initiated on OAT with linkage to care after hospital discharge. Hospitals varied in the frequency of OAT delivery (range, 0 to 43% of qualified admissions). Patients with pre-admission OAT (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 15.30; 95% CI [13.2, 17.7]), acute OUD diagnosis (AOR = 2.3; 95% CI [1.99, 2.66]), and male gender (AOR 1.52; 95% CI [1.16, 2.01]) had increased odds of OAT receipt. Patients who received non-OAT opioids (AOR 0.53; 95% CI [0.46, 0.61]) or surgical procedures (AOR 0.75; 95% CI [0.57, 0.99]) had decreased odds of OAT receipt. Large-sized (AOR = 2.0; 95% CI [1.39, 3.00]) and medium-sized (AOR = 1.9; 95% CI [1.33, 2.70]) hospitals were more likely to provide OAT. CONCLUSIONS: In a sample of VHA inpatient medical admissions, OAT delivery was infrequent, varied across the health system, and was associated with specific patient and hospital characteristics. Policy and educational interventions should promote hospital-based OAT delivery.

Recommendations for integrating peer mentors in hospital-based addiction care.

Legislators and health systems have recently begun to explore the use of peer mentors as part of hospital-based addiction teams. Integrating peers into hospitals is a complex undertaking still in its infancy. Peers' lived experience of addiction and its consequences, combined with their distance from medical culture and hierarchy, is at the core of their power - and creates inherent challenges in integrating peers into hospital settings. Successful integration of peers in hospitals has unique challenges for individual providers, health systems, and the peers themselves. We have included peers as part of a hospital-based addiction medicine team at our hospital since 2015. In this article, we outline some unique challenges, share lessons learned, and provide recommendations for integrating peers into hospital-based SUD care. Challenges include the rigid professional hierarchy of hospitals which contrasts with peers' role, which is built on shared life experience and relationship; different expectations regarding professional boundaries and sharing personal information; the intensity of the hospital environment; and, illness severity of hospitalized people which can be emotionally draining and increase peers' own risk for relapse. Recommendations focus on establishing a way to finance the peer program, clearly defining the peer role, creating a home base within hospital settings, creating a collaborative and structured process for hiring and retaining peers, identifying peers who are likely to succeed, providing initial and ongoing training to peers that extends beyond typical peer certification, ways to introduce peer program to hospital staff, and providing regular, meaningful supervision. We hope that our recommendations help other hospital systems capitalize on the practical lessons learned from our experience.

"If It Wasn't for Him, I Wouldn't Have Talked to Them": Qualitative Study of Addiction Peer Mentorship in the Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations related to substance use disorders (SUD) are skyrocketing. Hospital providers commonly feel unprepared to care for patients with SUD and patients with SUD commonly feel discriminated against by hospital staff. This tension can lead to provider burnout and poor patient outcomes. Research in ambulatory settings suggests that peer mentors (PMs) can improve substance use outcomes and patient experience. However, no study has examined the role of peer mentorship for patients with SUD in hospitals. OBJECTIVE: Understand how peer mentorship affects care for hospitalized patients with SUD, and how working in a hospital affects PMs' sense of professional identity. DESIGN: Qualitative study utilizing participant observation, individual interviews, and focus groups related to the PM component of the Improving Addiction Care Team (IMPACT), a hospital-based interprofessional addiction medicine consult service. PARTICIPANTS: IMPACT providers, patients seen by IMPACT, PMs, and a PM supervisor. APPROACH: Qualitative thematic analysis. KEY RESULTS: PMs occupy a unique space in the hospital and are able to form meaningful relationships with hospitalized patients based on trust and shared lived experiences. PMs facilitate patient care by contextualizing patient experiences to teams and providers. Reciprocally, PMs "translate" provider recommendations to patients in ways that patients can hear. Respondents described PMs as "cultural brokers" who have the potential to transfer trust that they have earned with patients to providers and systems who may otherwise be viewed as untrustworthy. While PMs felt their role led to professional and personal development, the intensity of the role in the hospital setting also put them at risk for emotional drain and stress. CONCLUSIONS: While integrating PMs into hospital care presents substantial challenges, PMs may act as a "secret weapon" to engage often marginalized hospitalized patients with SUD and improve patient and provider experience.

Inpatient Addiction Medicine Consultation and Post-Hospital Substance Use Disorder Treatment Engagement: a Propensity-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations due to medical and surgical complications of substance use disorder (SUD) are rising. Most hospitals lack systems to treat SUD, and most people with SUD do not engage in treatment after discharge. OBJECTIVE: Determine the effect of a hospital-based addiction medicine consult service, the Improving Addiction Care Team (IMPACT), on post-hospital SUD treatment engagement. DESIGN: Cohort study using multivariable analysis of Oregon Medicaid claims comparing IMPACT patients with propensity-matched controls. PARTICIPANTS: 18-64-year-old Oregon Medicaid beneficiaries with SUD, hospitalized at an Oregon hospital between July 1, 2015, and September 30, 2016. IMPACT patients (n = 208) were matched to controls (n = 416) using a propensity score that accounted for SUD, gender, age, race, residence region, and diagnoses. INTERVENTIONS: IMPACT included hospital-based consultation care from an interdisciplinary team of addiction medicine physicians, social workers, and peers with lived experience in recovery. IMPACT met patients during hospitalization; offered pharmacotherapy, behavioral treatments, and harm reduction services; and supported linkages to SUD treatment after discharge. OUTCOMES: Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measure of SUD treatment engagement, defined as two or more claims on two separate days for SUD care within 34 days of discharge. RESULTS: Only 17.2% of all patients were engaged in SUD treatment before hospitalization. IMPACT patients engaged in SUD treatment following discharge more frequently than controls (38.9% vs. 23.3%, p < 0.01; aOR 2.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-3.58). IMPACT participation remained associated with SUD treatment engagement when limiting the sample to people who were not engaged in treatment prior to hospitalization (aOR 2.63; 95% CI 1.46-4.72). CONCLUSIONS: Hospital-based addiction medicine consultation can improve SUD treatment engagement, which is associated with reduced substance use, mortality, and other important clinical outcomes. National expansion of such models represents an opportunity to address an enduring gap in the SUD treatment continuum.

Lessons learned from the implementation of a medically enhanced residential treatment (MERT) model integrating intravenous antibiotics and residential addiction treatment.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations for severe infections associated with substance use disorder (SUD) are increasing. People with SUD often remain hospitalized for many weeks instead of completing intravenous antibiotics at home; often, they are denied skilled nursing facility admission. Residential SUD treatment facilities are not equipped to administer intravenous antibiotics. We developed a medically enhanced residential treatment (MERT) model integrating residential SUD treatment and long-term IV antibiotics as part of a broader hospital-based addiction medicine service. MERT had low recruitment and retention, and ended after six months. The goal of this study was to describe the feasibility and acceptability of MERT, to understand implementation factors, and explore lessons learned. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation. We included all potentially eligible MERT patients, defined by those needing ≥2 weeks of intravenous antibiotics discharged from February 1 to August 1, 2016. We used chart review to identify diagnoses, antibiotic treatment location, and number of recommended and actual IV antibiotic-days completed. We audio-recorded and transcribed key informant interviews with patients and staff. We conducted an ethnographic analysis of interview transcripts and implementation field notes. RESULTS: Of the 45 patients needing long-term intravenous antibiotics, 18 were ineligible and 20 declined MERT. 7 enrolled in MERT and three completed their recommended intravenous antibiotic course. MERT recruitment barriers included patient ambivalence towards residential treatment, wanting to prioritize physical health needs, and fears of untreated pain in residential. MERT retention barriers included high demands of residential treatment, restrictive practices due to PICC lines, and perceptions by staff and other residents that MERT patients "stood out" as "different." Despite the challenges, key informants felt MERT was a positive construct. CONCLUSIONS: Though MERT had many possible advantages; it proved more challenging to implement than anticipated. Our lessons may be applicable to future models integrating post-hospital intravenous antibiotics and SUD care.

Treatments Used Among Adolescent Residential Addiction Treatment Facilities in the US, 2022.

This study surveyed US adolescent residential addiction treatment facilities to assess treatments used for adolescents younger than 18 years seeking treatment for opioid use disorder.

"It's been an Experience, a Life Learning Experience": A Qualitative Study of Hospitalized Patients with Substance Use Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) have high rates of chronic illness and readmission, yet few are engaged in addiction treatment. Hospitalization may be a reachable moment for initiating and coordinating addiction care, but little is known about motivation for change in the inpatient setting. OBJECTIVE: To explore the experiences of hospitalized adults with SUD and to better understand patient and system level factors impacting readiness for change. DESIGN: We performed a qualitative study using individual interviews. The study was nested within a larger mixed-methods needs assessment. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Hospitalized adults admitted to medical or surgical units at an urban academic medical center who reported high-risk alcohol or drug use on AUDIT-C or single-item drug use screener. APPROACH: We conducted a thematic analysis, using an inductive approach at a semantic level. KEY RESULTS: Thirty-two patients participated. The mean age was 43 years; 75% were men, and 68% identified as white. Participants reported moderate to high-risk alcohol (39%), amphetamine (46%), and opioid (65%) use. Emergent themes highlight the influence of hospitalization at the patient, provider, and health system levels. Many patients experienced hospitalization as a wake-up call, where mortality was motivation for change and hospitalization disrupted substance use. However, many participants voiced complex narratives of social chaos, trauma, homelessness, and chronic pain. Participants valued providers who understood SUD and the importance of treatment choice. Patient experience suggests the importance of peers in the hospital setting, access to medication-assisted treatment, and coordinated care post-discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports that hospitalization offers an opportunity to initiate and coordinate addiction care, and provides insights into patient, provider, and health system factors which can leverage the reachability of this moment.

The care transitions innovation (C-TraIn) for socioeconomically disadvantaged adults: results of a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite growing emphasis on transitional care to reduce costs and improve quality, few studies have examined transitional care improvements in socioeconomically disadvantaged adults. It is important to consider these patients separately as many are high-utilizers, have different needs, and may have different responses to interventions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a multicomponent transitional care improvement program on 30-day readmissions, emergency department (ED) use, transitional care quality, and mortality. DESIGN: Clustered randomized controlled trial conducted at a single urban academic medical center in Portland, Oregon. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred eighty-two hospitalized low-income adults admitted to general medicine or cardiology who were uninsured or had public insurance. INTERVENTION: Multicomponent intervention including (1) transitional nurse coaching and education, including home visits for highest risk patients; (2) pharmacy care, including provision of 30 days of medications after discharge for those without prescription drug coverage; (3) post-hospital primary care linkages; (4) systems integration and continuous quality improvement. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes included 30-day inpatient readmission and ED use. Readmission data were obtained using state-wide administrative data for all participants (insured and uninsured). Secondary outcomes included quality (3-item Care Transitions Measure) and mortality. Research staff administering questionnaires and assessing outcomes were blinded. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in 30-day readmission between C-TraIn (30/209, 14.4 %) and control patients (27/173, 16.1 %), p = 0.644, or in ED visits between C-TraIn (51/209, 24.4 %) and control (33/173, 19.6 %), p = 0.271. C-TraIn was associated with improved transitional care quality; 47.3 % (71/150) of C-TraIn patients reported a high quality transition compared to 30.3 % (36/119) control patients, odds ratio 2.17 (95 % CI 1.30-3.64). Zero C-TraIn patients died in the 30-day post-discharge period compared with five in the control group (unadjusted p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: C-TraIn did not reduce 30-day inpatient readmissions or ED use; however, it improved transitional care quality.