A Longitudinal Multivariable Analysis: State Policies and Opioid Dispensing in Medicare Beneficiaries Undergoing Surgery.

BACKGROUND: States have implemented policies to decrease clinically unnecessary opioid prescribing, but few studies have examined how state policies affect opioid dispensing rate trends for surgical patients. OBJECTIVE: To examine trends in the perioperative opioid dispensing rates for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries and the effects of select state policies. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort study using 2006 to 2018 Medicare claims data for individuals undergoing surgical procedures for which opioid analgesic treatment is common. EXPOSURES: State policies mandating prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP; PDMP policies) use, initial opioid prescription duration limit (duration limit policies), and mandated continuing medical education (CME; CME pain policies) on pain management. MAIN MEASURES: Opioid dispensing rates, days' supply, and the daily morphine milligram equivalent dose (MMED). KEY RESULTS: The percentage of Medicare beneficiaries dispensed opioids in the perioperative period increased from 2007 to 2018; MMED and days' supply decreased over the same period, with significant variation by age, sex, and race. None of the three state policies affected the likelihood of Medicare beneficiaries being dispensed perioperative opioids. However, CME pain policies and duration limit policies were associated with decreased days' supply and decreased MMED in the several years following implementation, respectively. CONCLUSION: While we observed a slight increase in the rate of Medicare beneficiaries dispensed opioids perioperatively and a substantial decrease in MMED and days' supply for those receiving opioids, state policies examined had relatively modest effects on the main measures. Our findings suggest that these state policies may have a limited impact on opioid dispensing for a patient population that is commonly dispensed opioid analgesics to help control surgical pain, and as a result may have little direct effect on clinical outcomes for this population. Changes in opioid dispensing for this population may be the result of broader societal trends than such state policies.

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.

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.

A qualitative study of patient experiences with telemedicine opioid use disorder treatment during COVID-19.

Background: The drug-related overdose crisis worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic. Recent drug policy changes to increase access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) during COVID-19 shifted some outpatient MOUD treatment into virtual settings to reduce the demand for in-person care. The objective of this study was to qualitatively explore what is gained and lost in virtual patient encounters for patients with opioid use disorder at a low-threshold, addiction treatment clinic that offers buprenorphine and harm reduction services. Methods: Patients were included in this study if they received care at the Harm Reduction and BRidges to Care (HRBR) clinic and utilized virtual visits between November 2019 and March 2021. The study was conceptualized using a health care access framework and prior studies of telemedicine acceptability. Semi-structured interviews were completed between March and April 2021. Interviews were dual-coded and analyzed using directed content analysis. Results: Nineteen interviews were conducted. The sample was predominantly White (84%) and stably housed (79%) with comparable gender (male, 53%) and employment status (employed, 42%). The majority (63%) of patients preferred virtual visits compared to in-person visits (16%) or a combination of access to both (21%). Two overarching tandem domains emerged: availability-accommodation and acceptability-appropriateness. Availability-accommodation reflected participants' desires for immediate services and reduced transportation and work or caregiving scheduling barriers, which was facilitated by virtual visits. The acceptable-appropriate domain articulated how participants felt connected to their providers, whether through in-person interactions or the mutual trust experienced during virtual visits. Conclusions: Virtual visits were perceived by participants as a valuable and critical option for accessing treatment for OUD. While many participants preferred virtual visits, some favored face-to-face visits due to relational and physical interactions with providers. Participants desired flexibility and the ability to have a choice of treatment modality depending on their needs.

Opioid treatment programs, telemedicine and COVID-19: A scoping review.

Background: Methadone and buprenorphine are effective medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) that are highly regulated in the United States. The on-going opioid crisis, and more recently COVID-19, has prompted reconsideration of these restrictions in order to sustain and improve treatment access, with renewed interest in telemedicine. We reviewed the evidence on use of telemedicine interventions and applicability to MOUD policy changes in the post-COVID-19 treatment landscape. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases were searched from inception to April 2021 and reference lists were reviewed to identify additional studies. Studies were eligible if they examined telemedicine interventions and reported outcomes (e.g. treatment initiation, retention in care). Randomized trials and controlled observational studies were prioritized; other studies were included when stronger evidence was unavailable. One investigator abstracted key information and a second investigator verified data. We described the results qualitatively. Results: We identified nine studies: three controlled trials (two randomized), and six observational studies. Three studies evaluated patients treated with methadone and six studies with buprenorphine, including one study of pregnant women with OUD. All studies showed telemedicine approaches associated with similar outcomes (treatment retention, positive urine toxicology) compared to treatment as usual. Trials were limited by small samples sizes, lack of reporting harms, and most were conducted prior to the COVID-19 pandemic; observational studies were limited by failure to control for confounding. Conclusions: Limited evidence suggests that telemedicine may enhance access to MOUD with similar effectiveness compared with face-to-face treatment. Few studies have been published since COVID-19, and it is unclear the potential impact of these interventions on the existing racial/ethnic disparities in treatment. The COVID-19 pandemic and need for social distancing led to temporary policy changes for prescribing of MOUD that could inform additional research in this area to support comprehensive policy reforms.

Expanding Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder: Program and Policy Approaches from Outside the Veterans Health Administration.

To mitigate morbidity and mortality of the drug-related overdose crisis, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) can increase access to treatments that save lives-medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Despite an increasing need, MOUD continues to be underutilized due to multifaceted barriers that exist within broader macro- and microenvironments. To promote MOUD utilization, policymakers and healthcare leaders should (1) identify and implement person-centered MOUD delivery systems (e.g., the Medication First Model, community-informed design); (2) recognize and address MOUD delivery gaps (e.g., the Best-Practice in Oral Opioid Agonist Collaborative); (3) broaden the definition of the MOUD delivery system (e.g., access to MOUD in non-clinical settings); and (4) expand MOUD options (e.g., injectable opioid agonist therapy). Increasing access to MOUD is not a singular fix to the overdose-related crisis. It is, however, a possible first step to mitigate harm, and save lives.

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.

Time-to-completed-imaging, survival and function in patients with spinal epidural abscess: Description of a series of 34 patients, 2015-2018.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal epidural abscess (SEA) is a rare and life-threatening infection with increasing incidence over the past two decades. Delays in diagnosis can cause significant morbidity and mortality among patients. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe trends in time-to-imaging and intervention, risk factors, and outcomes among patients presenting to the emergency department with SEA at a single academic medical center in Portland, Oregon. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from patients with new SEA diagnosis at a single hospital from October 1, 2015 to April 1, 2018. We describe averages to time-to-imaging and interventions, and frequencies of risk factors and outcomes among patients presenting to the emergency department with SEA. RESULTS: Of the 34 patients included, 7 (20%) died or were discharged with plegia during the study period. Those who died or were discharged with plegia (n = 7) had shorter mean time-to-imaging order (20.8 h versus 29.2 h). Patients with a history of intravenous drug use had a longer mean time-to-imaging order (30.2 h versus 23.7 h) as compared to those without intravenous drug use. Patients who died or acquired plegia had longer times from imaging completed to final imaging read (20.9 h versus 7.1 h), but shorter times from final imaging read to surgical intervention among patients who received surgery (4.9 h versus 46.2 h). Further, only three (42.9%) of the seven patients who died or acquired plegia presented with the three-symptom classic triad of fever, neurologic symptoms, and neck or back pain. CONCLUSIONS: SEA is a potentially deadly infection that requires prompt identification and treatment. This research provides baseline data for potential quality improvement work at the study site. Future research should evaluate multi-center approaches for identifying and intervening to treat SEA, particularly among patients with intravenous drug use.

Making the business case for an addiction medicine consult service: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: As the drug poisoning crisis worsens in North America and opioid use disorder (OUD)-related hospital admissions increase, policymakers and hospital administrators are beginning to recognize the important role of hospitals in the OUD care continuum. This study explores and describes how U.S. addiction medicine physicians created and presented business propositions to hospital administrators to support the development of addiction medicine consult (AMC) services. METHODS: Fifteen qualitative interviews were completed with board-certified or board-eligible addiction medicine physicians from 14 U.S. hospitals. The interviews occurred as part of a broader mixed methods study exploring hospital service delivery for patients admitted with OUD. Using a directed content analysis, the transcribed interviews were coded, analyzed, and final themes consolidated. RESULTS: Semi-structured interviews completed with addiction medicine physicians from established (n = 9) and developing (n = 5) AMC services at 14 U.S. hospitals explored how clinical champions persuaded hospital administrators to support AMC service development. Four elements were foundational to making the "business case": 1) describing the prevalence of substance use disorder (SUD) or OUD in the hospital; 2) identifying the negative financial impacts of not treating SUDs during hospitalization; 3) highlighting the ongoing care quality and treatment gap for hospitalized patients with SUDs; and 4) noting the success of other institutional AMC services. Study findings informed the creation of tools to support AMC service development: 1) an AMC service business case template, and 2) an AMC service design and operations resource list. CONCLUSIONS: OUD-related hospital admissions are unlikely to abate. Hospital administrators should consider innovative care delivery mechanisms to improve care for persons with OUD. AMC services may be a promising delivery mechanism to achieve this aim. For clinical and administrative champions, understanding how to communicate the potential effectiveness of this intervention to hospital leaders is an essential first step to AMC service creation.

Pimping: a tradition of gendered disempowerment.

The use of pimping as a method of teaching is widespread in the clinical phase of medical education. In this paper we consider pimping's colloquial meanings and discuss how it was introduced into the language of medical education. We posit that such language reflects persistent gendered hierarchies in medicine, and we evaluate pimping's pedagogical value. Finally, we call for an end to the term and the practice, and for a renewed emphasis on pedagogy in medical education.

Treatment and Prevention of Opioid Use Disorder: Challenges and Opportunities.

Treatment for opioid use disorder in the United States evolved in response to changing federal policy and advances in science. Inpatient care began in 1935 with the US Public Health Service Hospitals in Lexington, Kentucky, and Fort Worth, Texas. Outpatient clinics emerged in the 1960s to provide aftercare. Research advances led to opioid agonist and opioid antagonist therapies. When patients complete opioid withdrawal, return to use is often rapid and frequently deadly. US and international authorities recommend opioid agonist therapy (i.e., methadone or buprenorphine). Opioid antagonist therapy (i.e., extended-release naltrexone) may also inhibit return to use. Prevention efforts emphasize public and prescriber education, use of prescription drug monitoring programs, and safe medication disposal options. Overdose education and naloxone distribution promote access to rescue medication and reduce opioid overdose fatalities. Opioid use disorder prevention and treatment must embrace evidence-based care and integrate with physical and mental health care.

Comorbidity and functional mobility in persons with Parkinson disease.

OBJECTIVES: To report the frequency, severity, and types of comorbidities in people with Parkinson disease (PD) using a validated self-report comorbidity screening tool, and to determine the relationship between comorbidity and functional mobility. DESIGN: A secondary analysis and cross-sectional observational study design. SETTING: University hospital; outpatient balance disorders laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Persons with mild to moderate idiopathic PD (N=76). INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatric (CIRS-G) and a comprehensive mobility assessment including gait (distance walked in 3 min), balance (mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test), and physical function (Physical Performance Test). RESULTS: All participants reported comorbidities in addition to their diagnosed PD. The average ± SD number of comorbidities was 6.96 ± 2.0 (range, 2-11), and the total CIRS-G score ± SD was 12.7 ± 4.8. The most commonly reported organ systems with comorbidity were eyes and ears (89%), psychiatric (68%), musculoskeletal (64%), lower gastrointestinal (62%), respiratory (60.5%), upper gastrointestinal (59.2%), and genitourinary (53.9%). The total CIRS-G score was significantly related to functional mobility: gait (r=-.53, P=.0001), balance (r=-.43, P=.0003), and physical performance (r=-.36, P=.0041). Of the original 14 organ systems measured, there were 7 systems that, when combined, best predicted gait performance, 6 systems combined that best predicted balance performance, and 4 systems combined that predicted functional performance. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports a high frequency of multiple medical system comorbidity in people with mild to moderate PD. Furthermore, comorbidity scores were associated with mobility disability: gait, balance, and physical function. Early intervention is important to delay mobility disability in PD, and we recommend that people with PD found to have comorbidities should be screened for balance and gait deficits.

Instrumenting the balance error scoring system for use with patients reporting persistent balance problems after mild traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether alterations to the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), such as modified conditions and/or instrumentation, would improve the ability to correctly classify traumatic brain injury (TBI) status in patients with mild TBI with persistent self-reported balance complaints. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Outpatient clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects (n=13; age, 16.3±2y) with a recent history of concussion (mild TBI group) and demographically matched control subjects (n=13; age, 16.7±2y; control group). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures included the BESS, modified BESS, instrumented BESS, and instrumented modified BESS. All subjects were tested on the noninstrumented BESS and modified BESS and were scored by visual observation of instability in 6 and 3 stance conditions, respectively. Instrumentation of these 2 tests used 1 inertial sensor with an accelerometer and gyroscope to quantify bidirectional body sway. RESULTS: Scores from the BESS and the modified BESS tests were similar between groups. However, results from the instrumented measures using the inertial sensor were significantly different between groups. The instrumented modified BESS had superior diagnostic classification and the largest area under the curve when compared with the other balance measures. CONCLUSIONS: A concussion may disrupt the sensory processing required for optimal postural control, which was measured by sway during quiet stance. These results suggest that the use of portable inertial sensors may be useful in the move toward more objective and sensitive measures of balance control postconcussion, but more work is needed to increase sensitivity.

Contextualizing the Resurgence of U.S. Housestaff Union Activity.

ABSTRACT: There is a growing trend of resident and fellow physician unionization in the United States, with 14 new housestaff unions formed at private employers since 2022. This resurgence of housestaff union organizing parallels the last era of housestaff activism in the 1960s. Today's housestaff organizing takes place within the context of longstanding challenges in medicine, including the burnout and systemic inequities highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and an increase in national activism and labor organizing. Housestaff unions offer opportunities for residents and fellows to negotiate for improvements across multiple issues.In this Commentary, the authors focus on common bargaining topics: poor working conditions, undercompensation, and inadequate representation in an increasingly corporatized health care landscape. The authors also discuss the role of collective bargaining for improving the housestaff experience and address common concerns about unionization. Finally, the authors explore the limited evidence of the impact of unions in health care settings and outline key considerations for future scholarship.The current generation of housestaff started their medical careers with an awareness of systemic challenges to the profession and have responded through collective organizing. While the short- and long-term ramifications of housestaff organizing need further study, the authors express optimism that unionization will lead to improved working conditions and thus improved health care delivery.

Hospital policies for opioid use disorder treatment: A policy content analysis and environmental scan checklist.

OBJECTIVE: Hospital-based delivery of opioid agonist therapy ([OAT]; buprenorphine, methadone) is an often-overlooked component of the opioid use disorder (OUD) care continuum. Hospitals are complex clinical environments and organizational policies may inform access to care. This study aimed to identify and describe OUD-related hospital policies. METHODS: We obtained policies through a purposive sampling of addiction physicians affiliated with 10 U.S. hospitals. Experts provided 25 documents that we analyzed using a framework analysis. We then assessed policy concordance with national recommendations and conducted a post-hoc synthesis to create an environmental scan checklist. RESULTS: We observed two hospital policy domains, with four sub-domains, each: 1) OAT management (a. acute pain and perioperative; b. OAT continuation; c. OAT initiation; d. opioid withdrawal) and 2) security and behavioral management (a. aberrant drug use; b. patient-directed discharge; c. safety protocols; d. peripherally inserted central catheters). OAT policy concordance with national guidance varied by sub-domain. Our post-hoc synthesis resulted in a hospital policy environmental scan checklist. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital policies are not a singular solution to increasing OAT access, however, in the midst of a worsening drug-related overdose crisis, we observed the divergence of policies from federal recommendations. Policies should enhance, rather than deter OAT access.

Reduction in Oregon's Medication Dosing Visits After the SARS-CoV-2 Relaxation of Restrictions on Take-home Medication.

To slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in opioid treatment programs (OTPs), SAMHSA notified State Opioid Treatment Authorities that stable patients could receive up to 27 days of take-homes, less stable patients could receive up to 13 days with fewer take-homes for other patients. An analysis assessed how the relaxed standards affected the number of patient dosing visits and the amount of take-home medications dispensed in Oregon's 20 public, nonprofit, and for-profit OTPs. OTPs reported the number of patients receiving take homes pre and post federal policy change at 3 time points: pre SARS-CoV-2 (February or first half of March), post 1 SARS-CoV-2 (March, April, or May), and post 2 SARS-CoV-2 (April, May, or June). The patients receiving each quantity of take-homes were counted and means calculated for visits and take-homes per patient per month. A negative binomial mixed-effects regression model assessed change in mean dosing visits per patient. During the pre SARS-CoV-2 period, OTPs served 7792 patients monthly with 120,513 medication visits and dispensed 44,883 take-home doses. Mean patient visits per month were 15.5 with 5.8 take-homes per patient per month. Following the policy change, medication visits declined 33% and take-home medication increased 97% with 10.4 mean visits per patient and 11.3 mean take-homes per patient. The negative binomial mixed-effects regression model estimated a 54% reduction in mean visits per patient. The policy change had the intended effect. More research is needed to assess unintended consequences associated with increased access to take-home medication.

Addressing a rapidly changing service landscape during the COVID-19 pandemic: Creation of the Oregon substance use disorder resource collaborative.

Following the rising crisis of COVID-19 and the Oregon governor's stay-at-home orders, members of the Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) inpatient addiction consult service recognized that local addiction treatment and recovery organizations were operating at limited capacity. As a result, discharge planning, patient access to local community-based treatment, and safety-net programming were affected. Given structural and intersectional risk vulnerabilities of people with substance use disorders (SUDs), the OHSU members felt that COVID-19 would disproportionately impact chronically marginalized members of our community. These inequities inspired the formation of the Oregon substance use disorder resources collaborative (ORSUD) led by four medical students. ORSUD's mission is to support the efforts of local safety-net organizations that and front-line providers who serve chronically marginalized community members in the midst of the global pandemic. We operationalized our mission through: 1) collecting and disseminating operational and capacity changes in local addiction and harm reduction services to the broader treatment community, and 2) identifying and addressing immediate resource needs for local safety-net programs. Our program uses a real-time public-facing document to collate local programmatic updates and general community resources. COVID-19 disproportionately burdens people with SUDs; thus, ORSUD exists to support programs serving people with SUDs and will continue to evolve to meet their needs and the needs of those who serve them.

Office-Based Methadone Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder and Pharmacy Dispensing: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: The authors conducted a scoping review to survey the evidence landscape for studies that assessed outcomes of treating patients with opioid use disorder with methadone in office-based settings. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched, and reference lists were reviewed to identify additional studies. Studies were eligible if they focused on methadone treatment in office-based settings conducted in the United States or other highly developed countries and reported outcomes (e.g., retention in care). Randomized trials and controlled observational studies were prioritized; uncontrolled and descriptive studies were included when stronger evidence was unavailable. One investigator abstracted key information, and a second verified data. A scoping review approach broadly surveyed the evidence, and therefore study quality was not rated formally. RESULTS: Eighteen studies of patients treated with office-based methadone were identified, including six trials, eight observational studies, and four additional articles discussing use of pharmacies to dispense methadone. Studies on office-based methadone treatment, including primary care-based dispensing, were limited but consistently found that stable methadone patients valued office-based care and remained in care with low rates of drug use; outcomes were similar compared with stable patients in regular care. Office-based methadone treatment was associated with higher treatment satisfaction and quality of life. Limitations included underpowered comparisons and small samples. CONCLUSIONS: Limited research suggests that office-based methadone treatment and pharmacy dispensing could enhance access to methadone treatment for patients with opioid use disorder without adversely affecting patient outcomes and, potentially, inform modifications to federal regulations. Research should assess the feasibility of office-based care for less stable patients.

"Now hospital leaders are paying attention": A qualitative study of internal and external factors influencing addiction consult services.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations related to opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasing, necessitating an increase in the delivery of opioid agonist therapy (OAT) among hospitalized adults. The addiction consult service (ACS) is a promising organizational intervention to address this growing clinical need. Little is known about the barriers and facilitators of ACS development and operations. METHODS: We completed 17 semi-structured telephone interviews with board-certified or board-eligible addiction physicians across 16 U.S. acute care hospitals. Interviews explored contextual facilitators and barriers for ACS development and operations. We transcribed, coded, analyzed interviews, and derived final themes using a directed content analysis. RESULTS: We identified six themes that promoted or inhibited ACS development and operations: 1) stigma and discrimination; 2) internal (e.g., hospital administrators) and external stakeholders (e.g., State Medicaid programs); 3) addiction-informed institutions with addiction-related resources; 4) access to community-based treatment programs (e.g., local opioid treatment programs); 5) restrictive and misinterpreted OAT policies; and 6) service financing. The first theme, stigma and discrimination, is presented as a stand-alone-theme but permeates the five other themes as a broader meta-theme. CONCLUSIONS: As OUD-related hospitalizations increase, and the opioid-related overdose crisis continues, understanding the constraints related to the development and operations of ACSs are important preliminary steps for improving the care of patients hospitalized with OUD. Clinical champions, hospital leaders, and hospital societies could act, through practice and policy initiatives, to support ACS development and increase the delivery of evidence-based services (e.g., OAT) to patients hospitalized with OUD.