Buprenorphine treatment and clinical outcomes under the opioid use disorder cascade of care.

BACKGROUND: Challenges to engagement and retention on buprenorphine undermine treatment of individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). Under the OUD Cascade of Care framework, we sought to identify patient characteristics and treatment response associated with superior clinical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of specialty buprenorphine treatment patients entering treatment (n=19,487) based on EHR records from a large multi-state buprenorphine treatment network (2011-2019). Person-level care episodes were evaluated across treatment intake, engagement (i.e. 2+ visits in the month following intake), and retention at 6, 12, and 24 months. Time to achieving 90 days of continuous opioid abstinence was assessed using Cox proportional hazards regressions models and also assessed as a predictor of long-term retention. RESULTS: Most patients engaged (82.4 %), but retention steadily declined over 6-month (38.7 %), 12-month (26.2 %), and 24-month (17.1 %) timepoints. Opioid-positive baseline tests were associated with lower hazards of achieving continuous abstinence for both buprenorphine-positive (aHR=0.33, p<.001) and buprenorphine-negative (aHR=0.49,p<.001) intakes. Opioid abstinence was associated with buprenorphine-positive baseline testing (aHR=1.59,p<.001), especially for those testing opioid-negative (aHR=1.82,p<.001). Patients who achieved and sustained abstinence at 6 months in care were 4.1 and 5.5 times as likely to achieve 12-month and 24-month retention, respectively, compared to patients with intermittent opioid use. CONCLUSION: Treatment discontinuation was concentrated early in care and buprenorphine and opioid status at intake were prognostic of achieving and sustaining abstinence. Early abstinence was associated with higher likelihood of subsequent stage progression. Implementing interventions to support early clinical stability for high-risk patients is critical to improve clinical outcomes.

Racial/ethnic differences in risk of suicidal ideation and suicide attempts in a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Suicidal ideation (SI) and suicide attempts (SA) are risk factors for suicide which peak during adolescence; however, evidence focused on differences in SI and SA risk among racial/ethnic minority youth is limited despite increasing suicide rates among several racial/ethnic minority groups. METHODS: We analyzed a representative sample of adolescents aged 12-17 with prior depressive symptoms (n = 32,617) from the cross-sectional National Surveys on Drug Use and Health (2008-2019). Survey-weighted adjusted logistic regressions estimated the association of race/ethnicity with self-reported lifetime SI and SA, controlling for sociodemographics, lifetime substance use, lifetime major depressive episode, and self-rated health. RESULTS: Compared to white adolescents, Black and Hispanic adolescents had a 2.5 % (p = 0.04) and 4.2 % (p < 0.001) lower likelihood of reporting SI. However, among participants reporting SI, Black and Hispanic adolescents had a 3.2 % (p = 0.03) and 3.1 % (p = 0.03) higher likelihood of reporting SA than white adolescents. Multiracial adolescents were 5.9 % (p = 0.03) more likely to report SA than white adolescents. LIMITATIONS: Although racial/ethnic minority groups are less likely to self-report mental health symptoms, we could only assess SI/SA among adolescents self-reporting prior depressive symptoms, and we could only assess SA among adolescents self-reporting SI due to survey methods. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in the racial/ethnic distribution of suicidality supports theories conceptualizing separate pathways for SI and SA. This underscores the need for greater attention to racial/ethnic differences in suicide-related research, surveillance, and prevention efforts, including ensuring that mental health risk assessments directly evaluate SA in addition to SI in order to better identify high-risk racial/ethnic minority youth.

Pain Management Treatments and Opioid Use Disorder Risk in Medicaid Patients.

INTRODUCTION: People with chronic pain are at increased risk of opioid misuse. Less is known about the unique risk conferred by each pain management treatment, as treatments are typically implemented together, confounding their independent effects. This study estimated the extent to which pain management treatments were associated with risk of opioid use disorder (OUD) for those with chronic pain, controlling for baseline demographic and clinical confounding variables and holding other pain management treatments at their observed levels. METHODS: Data were analyzed in 2024 from 2 chronic pain subgroups within a cohort of non-pregnant Medicaid patients aged 35-64 years, 2016-2019, from 25 states: those with (1) chronic pain and physical disability (CPPD) (N=6,133) or (2) chronic pain without disability (CP) (N=67,438). Nine pain management treatments were considered: prescription opioid (1) dose and (2) duration; (3) number of opioid prescribers; opioid co-prescription with (4) benzo- diazepines, (5) muscle relaxants, and (6) gabapentinoids; (7) nonopioid pain prescription, (8) physical therapy, and (9) other pain treatment modality. The outcome was OUD risk. RESULTS: Having opioids co-prescribed with gabapentin or benzodiazepine was statistically significantly associated with a 37-45% increased OUD risk for the CP subgroup. Opioid dose and duration also were significantly associated with increased OUD risk in this subgroup. Physical therapy was significantly associated with an 18% decreased risk of OUD in the CP subgroup. DISCUSSION: Coprescription of opioids with either gabapentin or benzodiazepines may substantially increase OUD risk. More positively, physical therapy may be a relatively accessible and safe pain management strategy.

Associations between cannabis policies and state-level specialty cannabis use disorder treatment in the United States, 2004-2019.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis use disorder (CUD) treatment prevalence decreased in the US between 2002 and 2019, yet structural mechanisms for this decrease are poorly understood. We tested associations between cannabis laws becoming effective and self-reported CUD treatment. METHODS: Restricted-use 2004-2019 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health included people ages 12+ classified as needing CUD treatment (i.e., past-year DSM-5-proxy CUD or last/current specialty treatment for cannabis). Time-varying indicators of medical cannabis laws (MCL) with/without cannabis dispensary provisions differentiated state-years before/after laws using effective dates. Multi-level logistic regressions with random state intercepts estimated individual- and state-adjusted CUD treatment odds by MCLs and model-based changes in specialty CUD treatment state-level prevalence. Secondary analyses tested associations between CUD treatment and MCL or recreational cannabis laws (RCL). RESULTS: Using a broad treatment need sample definition in 2004-2014, specialty CUD treatment prevalence decreased by 1.35 (95 % CI = -2.51, -0.18) points after MCL without dispensaries and by 2.15 points (95 % CI = -3.29, -1.00) after MCL with dispensaries provisions became effective, compared to before MCL. Among people with CUD in 2004-2014, specialty treatment decreased only in MCL states with dispensary provisions (aPD = -0.91, 95 % CI = -1.68, -0.13). MCL were not associated with CUD treatment use in 2015-2019. RCL were associated with lower CUD treatment among people classified as needing CUD treatment, but not among people with past-year CUD. CONCLUSIONS: Policy-related reductions in specialty CUD treatment were concentrated in states with cannabis dispensary provisions in 2004-2014, but not 2015-2019, and partly driven by reductions among people without past-year CUD. Other mechanisms (e.g., CUD symptom identification, criminal-legal referrals) could contribute to decreasing treatment trends.

Association of medications for opioid use disorder with reduced risk of repeat opioid overdose in Medicaid: A cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Following a nonfatal opioid overdose, patients are at high risk for repeat overdose. The objective of this study was to examine the association of MOUD after nonfatal opioid overdose with risk of repeat overdose in the following year. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed Missouri Medicaid claims from July 2012 to December 2021. The study identified opioid overdoses occurring between 2013 and 2020 using diagnosis codes for opioid poisoning in an inpatient or emergency department setting. The study implemented Cox models with a time-varying covariate for post-overdose receipt of MOUD. RESULTS: During the study period, MOUD receipt after overdose more than tripled, from 4.8 % to 18.9 %. Overall, only 12.1 % of patients received MOUD in the year after index. MOUD during follow-up was associated with significantly lower risk of repeat overdose (HR = 0.34, 95 % CI = 0.14-0.82). Out of 3017 individuals meeting inclusion criteria, 13.6 % had a repeat opioid overdose within 1 year. Repeat overdose risk was higher for those whose index overdose involved heroin or synthetic opioids (HR = 1.71, 95 % CI = 1.35-2.15), but MOUD was associated with significantly reduced risk in this group (HR = 0.34, 95 % CI = 0.13-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: MOUD receipt was associated with reduced risk of repeat overdose. Those whose index overdoses involved heroin or synthetic opioids were at greater risk of repeat overdose, but MOUD was associated with reduced risk in this group.

Suicide within 1 year of non-fatal overdose: Risk factors and risk reduction with medications for opioid use disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with substance use disorders and overdoses have high risk of suicide death, but evidence is limited on the relationship between interventions following the initial overdose and subsequent suicide death. METHODS: National Medicare data were used to identify Medicare disability beneficiaries (MDBs) with inpatient or emergency care for non-fatal opioid overdoses from 2008 to 2016. Data were linked with National Death Index (NDI) to obtain dates and causes of death for the sample. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the associations between exposure to interventions (mechanical ventilation, MOUD) and suicide death. RESULTS: The sample (n = 81,654) had a suicide rate in the year following a non-fatal overdose of 566 per 100,000 person-years. Post-overdose MOUD was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.20 (95%CI: 0.05,0.85). Risk of suicide was elevated for those whose initial overdoses required mechanical ventilation as part of the treatment (aHR: 1.86, 95%CI:[1.48,2.34]). CONCLUSIONS: The year following a non-fatal opioid overdose is a very high-risk period for suicide among MDBs. Those receiving MOUD had an 80% reduction in the hazards of suicide, while those whose overdose treatment involved mechanical ventilation had 86% higher hazards of death by suicide. Our findings highlight the importance of psychiatric intervention in this high-risk population. Efforts are needed to initiate and retain more patients in MOUD.

Independent and joint contributions of physical disability and chronic pain to incident opioid use disorder and opioid overdose among Medicaid patients.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain has been extensively explored as a risk factor for opioid misuse, resulting in increased focus on opioid prescribing practices for individuals with such conditions. Physical disability sometimes co-occurs with chronic pain but may also represent an independent risk factor for opioid misuse. However, previous research has not disentangled whether disability contributes to risk independent of chronic pain. METHODS: Here, we estimate the independent and joint adjusted associations between having a physical disability and co-occurring chronic pain condition at time of Medicaid enrollment on subsequent 18-month risk of incident opioid use disorder (OUD) and non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose among non-elderly, adult Medicaid beneficiaries (2016-2019). RESULTS: We find robust evidence that having a physical disability approximately doubles the risk of incident OUD or opioid overdose, and physical disability co-occurring with chronic pain increases the risks approximately sixfold as compared to having neither chronic pain nor disability. In absolute numbers, those with neither a physical disability nor chronic pain condition have a 1.8% adjusted risk of incident OUD over 18 months of follow-up, those with physical disability alone have an 2.9% incident risk, those with chronic pain alone have a 3.6% incident risk, and those with co-occurring physical disability and chronic pain have a 11.1% incident risk. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that those with a physical disability should receive increased attention from the medical and healthcare communities to reduce their risk of opioid misuse and attendant negative outcomes.

Association of Cannabis Legalization with Cannabis Positive Drug Screening in US Veterans.

Background: Although cannabis legalization is associated with increases in self-report cannabis use, biological measures of cannabis use are needed to address potential bias introduced by improved self-reporting of cannabis use in states enacting medical cannabis laws (MCL) and recreational cannabis laws (RCL). Objective: Quantify the role of MCL and RCL enactment in cannabis positive urine drug screen (UDS) prevalence among Veterans Health Administration (VHA) emergency department (ED) patients from 2008 to 2019. Design: Staggered-adoption difference-in-difference analysis were used to estimate the role of MCL and RCL in cannabis positive UDS data, fitting adjusted linear binomial regression models to estimate the association between MCL and RCL enactment and prevalence of cannabis positive UDS. Participants: VHA enrolled veterans aged 18-75 years with ≥1 ED visit in a given year from 2008 to 2019. Main Measures: Receipt of ≥1 cannabis positive UDS during an ED visit were analyzed. Key Results: From 2008 to 2019, adjusted cannabis positive UDS prevalences increased from 16.4% to 25.6% in states with no cannabis law, 16.6% to 27.6% in MCL-only enacting states, and 18.2% to 33.8% in RCL-enacting states. MCL-only and MCL/RCL enactment was associated with a 0.8% (95% CI, 0.4-1.0) and 2.9% (95% CI, 2.5-3.3) absolute increase in cannabis positive UDS, respectively. Significant effect sizes were found for MCL and RCL, such that 7.0% and 18.5% of the total increase in cannabis positive UDS prevalence in MCL-only and RCL states could be attributed to MCLs and RCLs. Conclusions: In this study of VHA ED patients, MCL and RCL enactment played a significant role in the overall increases in cannabis positive UDS. The increase in a biological measure of cannabis use reduces concerns that previously documented increases in self-reported cannabis use from surveys are due to changes in patient willingness to report use as it becomes more legal.

Racial And Ethnic Disparities In Buprenorphine Receipt Among Medicare Beneficiaries, 2015-19.

We examined Medicare Part D claims from the period 2015-19 to identify state and national racial and ethnic disparities in buprenorphine receipt among Medicare disability beneficiaries with diagnosed opioid use disorder or opioid overdose. Racial and ethnic disparities in buprenorphine use remained persistently high during the study period, especially for Black beneficiaries, suggesting the need for targeted interventions and policies.

Racial/ethnic disparities in timely receipt of buprenorphine among Medicare disability beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Medicare disability beneficiaries (MDBs) have disproportionately high risk of opioid use disorder (OUD) and related harms given high rates of comorbidities and high-dose opioid prescribing. Despite this increased risk, little is known about timely receipt of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including potential disparities by patient race/ethnicity or moderation by county-level characteristics. METHODS: National Medicare claims for a sample of MDBs with incident OUD diagnosis between March 2016 and June 2019 were linked with county-level data. Multivariable mixed effects Cox proportional hazards models estimated time (in days) to buprenorphine receipt within 180 days of incident OUD diagnosis. Primary exposures included individual-level race/ethnicity and county-level buprenorphine prescriber availability, percent non-Hispanic white (NHW) residents, and Social Deprivation Index (SDI) score. RESULTS: The sample (n=233,079) was predominantly White (72.3%), ≥45 years old (76.3%), and male (54.8%). Black (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=0.50; 95% CI, 0.47-0.54), Asian/Pacific Islander (aHR=0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.72), Hispanic/Latinx (aHR=0.81; 95% CI, 0.76-0.87), and Other racial/ethnic groups (aHR=0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.97) had a lower likelihood of timely buprenorphine than non-Hispanic white beneficiaries after adjusting for individual and county-level confounders. Timely buprenorphine receipt was positively associated with county-level buprenorphine prescriber availability (aHR=1.05; 95% CI, 1.04-1.07), percent non-Hispanic white residents (aHR=1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01), and SDI (aHR=1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10). CONCLUSIONS: Racial/ethnic disparities highlight the need to improve access to care for underserved groups. Implementing equity-focused quality and performance measures and developing interventions to increase office-based buprenorphine prescribing in predominantly minority race/ethnicity counties may reduce disparities in timely access to medication for OUD.

Buprenorphine Utilization and Prescribing Among New Jersey Medicaid Beneficiaries After Adoption of Initiatives Designed to Improve Treatment Access.

Importance: Buprenorphine is underutilized as a treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD); state policies may improve buprenorphine access and utilization. Objective: To assess buprenorphine prescribing trends following New Jersey Medicaid initiatives designed to improve access. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional interrupted time series analysis included New Jersey Medicaid beneficiaries who were prescribed buprenorphine and had 12 months continuous Medicaid enrollment, OUD diagnosis, and no Medicare dual eligibility, as well as physician or advanced practitioners who prescribed buprenorphine to Medicaid beneficiaries. The study used Medicaid claims data from 2017 to 2021. Exposure: Implementation of New Jersey Medicaid initiatives in 2019 that removed prior authorizations, increased reimbursement for office-based OUD treatment, and established regional Centers of Excellence. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rate of buprenorphine receipt per 1000 beneficiaries with OUD; percentage of new buprenorphine episodes lasting at least 180 days; buprenorphine prescribing rate per 1000 Medicaid prescribers, overall and by specialty. Results: Of 101 423 Medicaid beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 41.0 [11.6] years; 54 726 [54.0%] male; 30 071 [29.6%] Black, 10 143 [10.0%] Hispanic, and 51 238 [50.5%] White), 20 090 filled at least 1 prescription for buprenorphine from 1788 prescribers. Policy implementation was associated with an inflection point in buprenorphine prescribing trend; after implementation, the trend increased by 36%, from 1.29 (95% CI, 1.02-1.56) prescriptions per 1000 beneficiaries with OUD to 1.76 (95% CI, 1.46-2.06) prescriptions per 1000 beneficiaries with OUD. Among beneficiaries with new buprenorphine episodes, the percentage retained for at least 180 days was stable before and after initiatives were implemented. The initiatives were associated with an increase in the growth rate of buprenorphine prescribers (0.43 per 1000 prescribers; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.51 per 1000 prescribers). Trends were similar across specialties, but increases were most pronounced among primary care and emergency medicine physicians (eg, primary care: 0.42 per 1000 prescribers; 95% CI, 0.32-0.53 per 1000 prescribers). Advanced practitioners accounted for a growing percentage of buprenorphine prescribers, with a monthly increase of 0.42 per 1000 prescribers (95% CI, 0.32-0.52 per 1000 prescribers). A secondary analysis to test for changes associated with non-state-specific secular trends in prescribing found that quarterly trends in buprenorphine prescriptions increased in New Jersey relative to all other states following initiative implementation. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of state-level New Jersey Medicaid initiatives designed to expand buprenorphine access, implementation was associated with an upward trend in buprenorphine prescribing and receipt. No change was observed in the percentage of new buprenorphine treatment episodes lasting 180 or more days, indicating that retention remains a challenge. Findings support implementation of similar initiatives but highlight the need for efforts to support long-term retention.

Buprenorphine After Nonfatal Opioid Overdose: Reduced Mortality Risk in Medicare Disability Beneficiaries.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid-involved overdose mortality is a persistent public health challenge, yet limited evidence exists on the relationship between opioid use disorder treatment after a nonfatal overdose and subsequent overdose death. METHODS: National Medicare data were used to identify adult (aged 18-64 years) disability beneficiaries who received inpatient or emergency treatment for nonfatal opioid-involved overdose in 2008-2016. Opioid use disorder treatment was defined as (1) buprenorphine, measured using medication days' supply, and (2) psychosocial services, measured as 30-day exposures from and including each service date. Opioid-involved overdose fatalities were identified in the year after nonfatal overdose using linked National Death Index data. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the associations between time-varying treatment exposures and overdose death. Analyses were conducted in 2022. RESULTS: The sample (N=81,616) was mostly female (57.3%), aged ≥50 years (58.8%), and White (80.9%), with a significantly elevated overdose mortality rate, compared with the general U.S. population (standardized mortality ratio=132.4, 95% CI=129.9, 135.0). Only 6.5% of the sample (n=5,329) had opioid use disorder treatment after the index overdose. Buprenorphine (n=3,774, 4.6%) was associated with a significantly lower risk of opioid-involved overdose death (adjusted hazard ratio=0.38, 95% CI=0.23, 0.64), but opioid use disorder-related psychosocial treatment (n=2,405, 2.9%) was not associated with risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio=1.18, 95% CI=0.71, 1.95). CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine treatment after nonfatal opioid-involved overdose was associated with a 62% reduction in the risk of opioid-involved overdose death. However, fewer than 1 in 20 individuals received buprenorphine in the subsequent year, highlighting a need to strengthen care connections after critical opioid-related events, particularly for vulnerable groups.

Naloxone expansion is not associated with increases in adolescent heroin use and injection drug use: Evidence from 44 US states.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone distribution is central to ongoing efforts to address the opioid overdose crisis. Some critics contend that naloxone expansion may inadvertently promote high-risk substance use behaviors among adolescents, but this question has not been directly investigated. METHODS: We examined relationships between naloxone access laws and pharmacy naloxone distribution with lifetime heroin and injection drug use (IDU), 2007-2019. Models generating adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) included year and state fixed effects, controlled for demographics and sources of variation in opioid environments (e.g., fentanyl penetration), as well as additional policies expected to impact substance use (e.g., prescription drug monitoring). Exploratory and sensitivity analyses further examined naloxone law provisions (e.g., third-party prescribing) and applied e-value testing to assess vulnerability to unmeasured confounding. RESULTS: Adoption of any naloxone law was not associated with changes in adolescent lifetime heroin or IDU. For pharmacy dispensing, we observed a small decrease in heroin use (aOR: 0.95 [CI: 0.92, 0.99]) and a small increase in IDU (aOR: 1.07 [CI: 1.02, 1.11]). Exploratory analyses of law provisions suggested that third-party prescribing (aOR: 0.80, [CI: 0.66, 0.96]) and non-patient-specific dispensing models (aOR: 0.78, [CI: 0.61, 0.99]) were associated with decreased heroin use but not decreased IDU. Small e-values associated with the pharmacy dispensing and provision estimates indicate that unmeasured confounding may explain observed findings. CONCLUSION: Naloxone access laws and pharmacy naloxone distribution were more consistently associated with decreases rather than increases in lifetime heroin and IDU among adolescents. Our findings therefore do not support concerns that naloxone access promotes high-risk adolescent substance use behaviors. As of 2019, all US states have adopted legislation to improve naloxone access and facilitate use. However, further removal of adolescent naloxone access barriers is an important priority given that the opioid epidemic continues to affect people of all ages.

Association of a State Prescribing Limits Policy with Opioid Prescribing and Long-term Use: an Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prescription opioids were a major initial driver of the opioid crisis. States have attempted to reduce overprescribing by enacting policies that limit opioid prescriptions, but the impacts of such policies on new prescribing and subsequent transitions to long-term use are not fully understood. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of implementation of a state prescribing limits policy with opioid prescribing and transitions to long-term opioid use. DESIGN: Interrupted time series analyses assessing trends in new opioid prescriptions and long-term use before and after policy implementation. PATIENTS: A total of 130,591 New Jersey Medicaid enrollees ages 18-64 who received an initial opioid prescription from January 2014 to December 2019. INTERVENTIONS: New Jersey's opioid prescribing limit policy implemented in March 2017. MAIN MEASURES: Total new opioid prescriptions, percentage of new prescriptions with >5 days' supply, and transition to long-term opioid use, defined as having opioid supply on day 90 after the initial prescription. KEY RESULTS: Policy implementation was associated with a significant monthly increase in new opioid prescriptions of 0.86 per 10,000 enrollees, halving the pre-policy decline in the prescribing rate. Among new opioid prescriptions, the percentage with >5 days' supply decreased by about 1 percentage point (-0.76 percentage points, 95% CI -0.89, -0.62) following policy implementation. However, policy implementation was associated with a significant monthly increase in the rate of initial prescriptions with supply on day 90 (9.95 per 10,000 new prescriptions, 95% CI 4.80, 15.11) that reversed the downward pre-implementation trend. CONCLUSIONS: The New Jersey policy was associated with a reduction in initial prescriptions with >5 days' supply, but not with an overall decline in new opioid prescriptions or in the rate at which initial prescriptions led to long-term use. Given their only modest benefits, policymakers and clinicians should carefully weigh potential unintended consequences of strict prescribing limits.

A modified Delphi process to identify experts' perceptions of the most beneficial and harmful laws to reduce opioid-related harm.

BACKGROUND: States have enacted multiple types of laws, with a variety of constituent provisions, in response to the opioid epidemic, often simultaneously. This temporal proximity and variation in state-to-state operationalization has resulted in significant challenges for empirical research on their effects. Thus, expert consensus can be helpful to classify laws and their provisions by their degree of helpfulness and impact. METHODS: We conducted a four-stage modified policy Delphi process to identify the top 10 most helpful and 5 most harmful provisions from eight opioid-related laws. This iterative consultation with six types of opioid experts included a preliminary focus group (n=12), two consecutive surveys (n=56 and n=40, respectively), and a final focus group feedback session (n=5). RESULTS: On a scale of very harmful (0) to very helpful (4), overdose Good Samaritan laws received the highest average helpfulness rating (3.62, 95% CI: 3.48-3.75), followed by naloxone access laws (3.37, 95% CI: 3.22-3.51), and pain management clinic laws (3.08, 95% CI: 2.89-3.26). Drug-induced homicide (DIH) laws were rated the most harmful (0.88, 95% CI: 0.66-1.11). Impact ratings aligned similarly, although Medicaid laws received the second highest overall impact rating (3.71, 95% CI: 3.45, 3.97). The two most helpful provisions were naloxone standing orders (3.94, 95% CI: 3.86-4.02) and Medicaid coverage of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) (3.89, 95% CI: 3.82). Mandatory minimum DIH laws were the most harmful provision (0.73, 95% CI 0.53-0.93); followed by requiring prior authorization for Medicaid coverage of MOUD (1.00 95% CI: 0.72-1.27). CONCLUSION: Overall, experts rated laws and provisions that facilitated harm reduction efforts and access to MOUD as most helpful. Laws and provisions rated as most harmful criminalized substance use and placed restrictions on access to MOUD. These ratings provide a foundation for evaluating the overall overdose policy environment for each state.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Buprenorphine and Extended-Release Naltrexone Filled Prescriptions During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: COVID-19 disrupted delivery of buprenorphine and naltrexone treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), and during the pandemic, members of racial and ethnic minority groups experienced increased COVID-19 and opioid overdose risks compared with White individuals. However, whether filled buprenorphine and naltrexone prescriptions varied across racial and ethnic groups during the COVID-19 pandemic remains unknown. Objective: To investigate whether disruptions in filled buprenorphine and naltrexone prescriptions differed by race and ethnicity and insurance status or payer type. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used retail pharmacy claims from May 2019 to June 2021 from the Symphony Health database, which includes 92% of US retail pharmacy claims, with race and ethnicity data spanning all insurance status and payer categories. Interrupted time series were used to estimate levels and trends of dispensed buprenorphine and naltrexone prescriptions before and after pandemic onset. Included individuals were those who filled buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone prescriptions. Data were analyzed from July 2021 through March 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Weekly rates of dispensed buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone prescription fills per 1000 patients and proportion of longer (ie, ≥14 days' supply) buprenorphine prescription fills were calculated. Analyses were stratified by patient race and ethnicity and further by insurance status and payer type for White and Black patients. Results: A total of 1 556 860 individuals who filled buprenorphine prescriptions (4359 Asian [0.3%], 94 657 Black [6.1%], 55 369 Hispanic [3.6%], and 664 779 White [42.7%]) and 127 506 individuals who filled extended-release naltrexone prescriptions (344 Asian [0.3%], 8186 Black [6.4%], 5343 Hispanic [4.2%], and 53 068 White [41.6%]) from May 6, 2019, to June 5, 2021, were analyzed. Prepandemic increases in buprenorphine fill rate flattened for all groups after COVID-19 onset (30.5 percentage point difference in trend; P < .001) compared with prepandemic trends. Significant level decreases in buprenorphine fills (ranging from 2.5% for Black patients; P = .009 to 4.0% for Hispanic patients; P = .009) at pandemic onset were observed for members of racial and ethnic minority groups but not White patients. At pandemic onset, rate of buprenorphine fills decreased in level for Medicare and cash-paying patients but with greater decreases for Black patients (Medicare: 10.0%; P < .001; cash: 20.0%; P < .001) than White patients (Medicare: 3.5%; P = .004; cash: 15.0%; P < .001). No decreases were found among Medicaid patients. Unlike buprenorphine, extended-release naltrexone had uniform level (from 10.0% for White patients with private insurance; P < .001 to 23.3% for Black patients with Medicare; P < .001) and trend (from 15.5 percentage points for White patients with Medicaid; P = .001 to 52.0 percentage points for Black patients with private insurance; P < .001) decreases across groups. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with immediate decreases in filled buprenorphine prescriptions by members of racial and ethnic minority groups but not White individuals. These findings suggest that members of racial and ethnic minority groups had larger losses in buprenorphine access during the pandemic across payer types.

Non-prescribed buprenorphine preceding treatment intake and clinical outcomes for opioid use disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Successful retention on buprenorphine improves outcomes for opioid use disorder (OUD); however, we know little about associations between use of non-prescribed buprenorphine (NPB) preceding treatment intake and clinical outcomes. METHODS: The study conducted observational retrospective analysis of abstracted electronic health record (EHR) data from a multi-state nationwide office-based opioid treatment program. The study observed a random sample of 1000 newly admitted patients with OUD for buprenorphine maintenance (2015-2018) for up to 12 months following intake. We measured use of NPB by mandatory intake drug testing and manual EHR coding. Outcomes included hazards of treatment discontinuation and rates of opioid use. RESULTS: Compared to patients testing negative for buprenorphine at intake, those testing positive (59.6%) had lower hazards of treatment discontinuation (HR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.60, p < 0.01). Results were little changed following adjustment for baseline opioid use and other patient characteristics (aHR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.51, 0.70, p < 0.01). Risk of discontinuation did not significantly differ between patients by buprenorphine source: prescribed v. NPB (reference) at admission (HR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.90, 1.46). Opioid use was lower in the buprenorphine positive group at admission (25.0% vs. 53.1%, p < 0.0001) and throughout early months of treatment but converged after 7 months for those remaining in care (17.1% vs. 16.5%, p = 0.89). CONCLUSION: NPB preceding treatment intake was associated with decreased hazards of treatment discontinuation and lower opioid use. These findings suggest use of NPB may be a marker of treatment readiness and that buprenorphine testing at intake may have predictive value for clinical assessments regarding risk of early treatment discontinuation.