Reducing perceived barriers to scaling up overdose education and naloxone distribution and medications for opioid use disorder in the United States in the HEALing (Helping End Addiction Long-Term®) communities study.

BACKGROUND: Scaling up overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is needed to reduce opioid overdose deaths, but barriers are pervasive. This study examines whether the Communities That HEAL (CTH) intervention reduced perceived barriers to expanding OEND and MOUD in healthcare/behavioral health, criminal-legal, and other/non-traditional venues. METHODS: The HEALing (Helping End Addiction Long-Term®) Communities Study is a parallel, wait-list, cluster randomized trial testing the CTH intervention in 67 communities in the United States. Surveys administered to coalition members and key stakeholders measured the magnitude of perceived barriers to scaling up OEND and MOUD in November 2019-January 2020, May-June 2021, and May-June 2022. Multilevel linear mixed models compared Wave 1 (intervention) and Wave 2 (wait-list control) respondents. Interactions by rural/urban status and research site were tested. RESULTS: Wave 1 respondents reported significantly greater reductions in mean scores for three outcomes: perceived barriers to scaling up OEND in Healthcare/Behavioral Health Venues (-0.26, 95% confidence interval, CI: -0.48, -0.05, p = 0.015), OEND in Other/Non-traditional Venues (-0.53, 95% CI: - 0.84, -0.22, p = 0.001) and MOUD in Other/Non-traditional Venues (-0.34, 95% CI: -0.62, -0.05, p = 0.020). There were significant interactions by research site for perceived barriers to scaling up OEND and MOUD in Criminal-Legal Venues. There were no significant interactions by rural/urban status. DISCUSSION: The CTH Intervention reduced perceived barriers to scaling up OEND and MOUD in certain venues, with no difference in effectiveness between rural and urban communities. More research is needed to understand facilitators and barriers in different venues.

Examining changes in pain interference via pandemic-induced isolation among patients receiving medication for opioid use disorder: a secondary data analysis.

BACKGROUND: Early in the pandemic, the United States population experienced a sharp rise in the prevalence rates of opioid use, social isolation, and pain interference. Given the high rates of pain reported by patients on medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), the pandemic presented a unique opportunity to disentangle the relationship between opioid use, pain, and social isolation in this high-risk population. We tested the hypothesis that pandemic-induced isolation would partially mediate change in pain interference levels experienced by patients on MOUD, even when controlling for baseline opioid use. Such work can inform the development of targeted interventions for a vulnerable, underserved population. METHODS: Analyses used data from a cluster randomized trial (N = 188) of patients on MOUD across eight opioid treatment programs. As part of the parent trial, participants provided pre-pandemic data on pain interference, opioid use, and socio-demographic variables. Research staff re-contacted participants between May and June 2020 and 133 participants (71% response rate) consented to complete a supplemental survey that assessed pandemic-induced isolation. Participants then completed a follow-up interview during the pandemic that again assessed pain interference and opioid use. A path model assessed whether pre-pandemic pain interference had an indirect effect on pain interference during the pandemic via pandemic-induced isolation. RESULTS: Consistent with hypotheses, we found evidence that pandemic-induced isolation partially mediated change in pain interference levels among MOUD patients during the pandemic. Higher levels of pre-pandemic pain interference and opioid use were both significantly associated with higher levels of pandemic-induced isolation. In addition, pre-pandemic pain interference was significantly related to levels of pain interference during the pandemic, and these pain levels were partially explained by the level of pandemic-induced isolation reported. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on MOUD with higher use of opioids and higher rates of pain pre-pandemic were more likely to report feeling isolated during COVID-related social distancing and this, in turn, partially explained changes in levels of pain interference. These results highlight social isolation as a key risk factor for patients on MOUD and suggest that interventions promoting social connection could be associated with reduced pain interference, which in turn could improve patient quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03931174 (Registered 04/30/2019).

Effective, but underused: lessons learned implementing contingency management in real-world practice settings in the United States.

Despite being one of the most effective adjunctive behavioral interventions in combination with medication for opioid use disorder, contingency management (CM) is one of the least available interventions in opioid treatment programs. This paradoxical state of affairs is perhaps the greatest example of the research-to-practice gap in the behavioral health field. Implementation science, a discipline that aims to identify replicable methods that can be used across settings and populations to bridge the gap between research and practice, can potentially help. Based on our team's experience implementing CM in opioid treatment programs, we detail five key lessons for researchers, clinicians, policy makers, and others seeking to implement and sustain CM in real-world settings. First, multiple barriers to CM implementation exist at both the counselor- and organization-levels, requiring multi-level solutions. Second, one-shot CM training alone is not sufficient for successful implementation: ongoing support is essential to achieve levels of intervention fidelity that will benefit patients. Third, assessing an organization's capacity for implementation prior to support provision can prevent costly mistakes. Fourth, implementors should plan for high staff turnover rates and expect the unexpected by developing detailed contingency plans. Finally, implementors should remember that the goal is to implement evidence-based CM and not simply incentives. We encourage colleagues to consider these lessons to increase the likelihood that CM can be implemented and sustained in a manner that improves the quality of care in opioid treatment programs.

The Prevalence and Negative Impacts of Substance Use Disorders among People with HIV in the United States: A Real-Time Delphi Survey of Key Stakeholders.

Although HIV and substance use disorders (SUDs) constitute a health syndemic, no research to date has examined the perceived negative impacts of different SUDs for people with HIV (PWH). In May 2019, 643 stakeholders in the U.S., representing clients of AIDS service organizations (ASOs), ASO staff, and HIV/AIDS Planning Council members, participated in an innovative Stakeholder-Engaged Real-Time Delphi (SE-RTD) survey focused on the prevalence and individual-level negative impact of five SUDs for PWH. The SE-RTD method has advantages over conventional survey methods by efficiently sharing information, thereby reducing the likelihood that between-group differences are simply due to lack of information, knowledge, and/or understanding. The population-level negative impacts were calculated by weighting each SUD's individual-level negative impact on indicators of the HIV Care Continuum and other important areas of life by the perceived prevalence of each SUD. Overall, we found these SUDs to have the greatest population-level negative impact scores (possible range 0-24): alcohol use disorder (population-level negative impact = 6.9; perceived prevalence = 41.9%), methamphetamine use disorder (population-level negative impact = 6.5; perceived prevalence = 3.2%), and opioid use disorder (population-level negative impact = 6.4; perceived prevalence = 34.6%). Beyond further demonstration of the need to better integrate SUD services within HIV settings, our findings may help inform how finite funding is allocated for addressing the HIV-SUD syndemic within the U.S. Based on our findings, such future efforts should prioritize the integration of evidence-based treatments that help address use disorders for alcohol, methamphetamine, and opioids.

Identifying Implementation Strategies That Address Barriers and Facilitate Implementation of Digital Interventions in HIV Primary Care Settings: Results from the Pilot Implementation of Positive Health Check.

We used the 1-month pilot implementation of Positive Health Check, a brief web-based video counseling intervention that supports patients with HIV attending HIV primary care clinics, to exemplify how studying implementation strategies earlier in the evidence-generation process can improve implementation outcomes in later pragmatic trials. We identified how implementation strategies were operationalized and the barriers and facilitators these strategies addressed using multiple data sources, including adapted implementation procedures and weekly structured interviews conducted with 9 key stakeholders in 4 HIV primary care clinics. Nineteen of 73 discrete implementation strategies for clinical innovations were used in the pilot implementation of Positive Health Check. Clinic staff reported 17 barriers and facilitators related to the clinic environment, patient population, intervention characteristics, and training and technical assistance. Identifying the link between strategies, barriers, and facilitators helped plan for a subsequent larger multisite pragmatic trial.

Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution Within Syringe Service Programs - United States, 2019.

Syringe service programs (SSPs), which provide access to sterile syringes and other injection equipment and their safe disposal after use,* represent a highly successful human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention intervention. SSPs are associated with a 58% reduction in the incidence of HIV infection among persons who inject drugs (1). In addition, SSPs have led efforts to prevent opioid overdose deaths by integrating evidence-based opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs (2-4). OEND programs train laypersons to respond during overdose events and provide access to naloxone and directions for drug delivery (2-4). SSPs are ideal places for OEND because they provide culturally relevant services designed to reach persons at high risk for experiencing or observing an opioid overdose. A 2013 survey found that only 55% of SSPs in the United States had implemented OEND (5). To characterize current implementation of OEND among SSPs, and to describe the current reach (i.e., the ratio of persons who received naloxone per opioid overdose death and the ratio of naloxone doses distributed per opioid overdose death) of SSP-based OEND programs by U.S. Census division,† a survey of known U.S. SSPs was conducted in 2019, which found that 94% of SSPs had implemented OEND. In addition, the reach of SSP-based OEND programs varied by U.S. Census division. Scaling up of SSP-based OEND delivery programs could be a critical component for areas of the country with high opioid overdose death rates and low reach.

User-centered design of contingency management for implementation in opioid treatment programs: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Contingency management (CM) is one of the only behavioral interventions shown to be effective for the treatment of opioid use disorders when delivered alone and in combination with pharmacotherapy. Despite extensive empirical support, uptake of CM in community settings remains abysmally low. The current study applied user-centered design principles to gather qualitative data on familiarity with CM, current clinical practice, and preferences regarding the implementation of CM in community-based opioid treatment programs. METHODS: Participants were 21 leaders and 22 front-line counselors from 11 community-based opioid treatment programs. Semi-structured interviews were about 45 min long. Transcripts from each interview were coded by independent raters and analyzed using a reflexive team approach. Frequencies of responses were tallied, and queries were run in NVivo to identify exemplar quotes for each code. RESULTS: Results indicated low familiarity with CM, with less than half of the respondents defining CM correctly and over 40% of respondents declining to answer/ did not know. Abstinence was the most commonly recommended CM target, yet over 70% of respondents indicated that urine screens only occurred monthly. Attendance was also a popular recommendation, with respondents suggesting a range of possible indices including counseling, dosing, and/or case management sessions. Regarding the ideal role to administer CM prizes, program directors and supervisors were most commonly recommended, closely followed by front-line counselors. The most commonly suggested strategies to afford CM incentives included soliciting community donations and offering non-financial incentives. CONCLUSIONS: User design principles to understand workflow constraints, target user needs, and simplify the intervention guided this qualitative investigation of CM implementation in opioid treatment programs. Findings highlighted the potential value of flexible, organization-specific definitions of CM attendance and non-financial incentives, as well as active involvement of clinical leaders and supervisors to promote buy in among staff/patients. Respondents were generally optimistic about their ability to fundraise or solicit donations to overcome cost-related barriers of CM. Implications for CM implementation strategies, including the use of targeted leadership coaching focused on sustainability, are explored.

Program Capacity to Eliminate Outcome Disparities in Addiction Health Services.

We evaluated program capacity factors associated with client outcomes in publicly funded substance abuse treatment organizations in one of the most populous and diverse regions of the United States. Using multilevel cross-sectional analyses of program data (n = 97) merged with client data from 2010 to 2011 for adults (n = 8,599), we examined the relationships between program capacity (leadership, readiness for change, and Medi-Cal payment acceptance) and client wait time and treatment duration. Acceptance of Medi-Cal was associated with shorter wait times, whereas organizational readiness for change was positively related to treatment duration. Staff attributes were negatively related to treatment duration. Overall, compared to low program capacity, high program capacity was negatively associated with wait time and positively related to treatment duration. In conclusion, program capacity, an organizational indicator of performance, plays a significant role in access to and duration of treatment. Implications for health care reform implementation in relation to expansion of public health insurance and capacity building to promote health equities are discussed.

A Behaviorally-Anchored Rating System to Monitor Treatment Integrity for Community Clinicians Using the Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach.

This study evaluated a process for training raters to reliably rate clinicians delivering the Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach (A-CRA) in a national dissemination project. The unique A-CRA coding system uses specific behavioral anchors throughout its 73 procedure components. Five randomly-selected raters each rated "passing" and "not passing" examples of the 19 A-CRA procedures. Ninety-four percent of the final ICCs were at least 'good' (≥.60) and 66.7% were 'excellent' (≥.75), and 95% of the ratings exceeded the 60% or better agreement threshold between raters and the gold standard. Raters can be trained to provide reliable A-CRA feedback for large-scale dissemination projects.

Organize and mobilize for implementation effectiveness to improve overdose education and naloxone distribution from syringe services programs: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The United States (US) continues to face decades-long increases in opioid overdose fatalities. As an opioid overdose reversal medication, naloxone can dramatically reduce opioid overdose mortality rates when distributed to people likely to experience or witness an opioid overdose and packaged with education on its use, known as overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND). Syringe services programs (SSPs) are ideal venues for OEND with staff who are culturally competent in providing services for people who are at risk of experiencing or observing an opioid overdose. We carried out a randomized controlled trial of SSPs to understand the effectiveness of the organize and mobilize for implementation effectiveness (OMIE) approach at improving OEND implementation effectiveness within SSPs. METHODS: Using simple randomization, 105 SSPs were enrolled into the trial and assigned to one of two study arms - (1) dissemination of OEND best practice recommendations (Control SSPs) or the OMIE approach along with dissemination of the OEND best practice recommendations (i.e., OMIE SSPs). OMIE SSPs could participate in 60-min OMIE sessions once a month for up to 12 months. At 12-month post-baseline, 102 of 105 SSPs (97%) responded to the follow-up survey. RESULTS: The median number of sessions completed by OMIE SSPs was 10. Comparing OMIE SSPs to control SSPs, we observed significant increases in the number of participants receiving naloxone (incidence rate ratio: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.42, 3.25; p < 0.01) and the rate of naloxone doses distributed per SSP participant (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.18, 3.30; p = 0.01). We observed no statistically significant difference in the number of adopted best practices between conditions (difference in means 0.2, 95% CI: - 0.7, 1.0; p = 0.68). We also observed a threshold effect where SSPs receiving a higher OMIE dose had greater effect sizes with regard to the number of people given naloxone and the number of naloxone doses distributed. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the multifaceted OMIE approach was effective at increasing naloxone distribution from SSPs, despite substantial external shocks during the trial. These findings have major implications for addressing the overdose crisis, which has continued unabated for decades. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03924505 . Registered 19 April 2019.