Addressing buprenorphine bottlenecks in the context of MAT Act implementation: A shared responsibility.

Medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) such as buprenorphine reduce overdose mortality and other opioid related acute health events but have historically been highly regulated. The recent Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment (MAT) Act ended the requirement clinicians complete a specified training and apply for a DATA 2000 ("X") waiver on their Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) number, to prescribe buprenorphine. With the MAT Act, any practitioner with Schedule III prescribing authority (a regular DEA number) can now prescribe buprenorphine for OUD. While this has potential to improve OUD treatment access, the impact will depend on implementation. Though the MAT Act may facilitate increased buprenorphine prescribing, ensuring adequate buprenorphine dispensing is also critical to improving Medications for opioid use disorder. Recognized buprenorphine bottlenecks arise from a complex convergence of factors in community pharmacies, threatening to undercut the benefits of the MAT Act. If prescribing increases but is not matched by increased dispensing, bottlenecks may worsen. Any worsening of buprenorphine bottlenecks could have a disproportionate impact in rural areas where residents may rely on fewer pharmacies to fill prescriptions for people in larger geographic area and where larger prescribing-dispensing gaps already exist such as in Southern states. Rigorous research will be needed to document the overall impact of the MAT Act on community pharmacists and their patients. At the federal level, pharmacists and their professional organizations should lobby the DEA to de-schedule or re-schedule buprenorphine. The DEA should announce a moratorium on enforcement actions against wholesalers and pharmacies related to buprenorphine distribution and dispensing. More supports should be offered to community pharmacies by state pharmacy boards and associations including continuing pharmacy education and technical assistance for advocating with wholesalers to increase buprenorphine order sizes, and to more effectively communicate with prescribers. Pharmacies should not have to face these challenges alone. Regulators, wholesalers, and researchers must join together with community pharmacies to further reduce regulatory barriers to dispensing, provide evidence-based interventions where needed to support pharmacy dispensing efforts, conduct rigorous implementation research, and be constantly vigilant in identifying and addressing multi-level buprenorphine bottlenecks in the wake of the MAT Act.

"You didn't have a choice, but to be on your train. The train was moving": West Virginia pharmacists' perspectives on opioid dispensing during the evolution of the opioid crisis.

BACKGROUND: West Virginia (WV) has been at the forefront of the opioid crisis in the United States, with the highest rate of opioid overdose mortality involving prescription opioids in the country. To curb the crisis, the state government implemented a restrictive opioid prescribing law in March 2018, Senate Bill 273 (SB273), to decrease opioid prescribing. However, sweeping changes in opioid policy can have downstream effects on stakeholders such as pharmacists. This study is part of a sequential mixed methods investigation of the impact of SB273 in WV in which we interviewed various stakeholders-including pharmacists-about the impact of the law. OBJECTIVES: This paper aims to explore how pharmacy practice during the opioid crisis impacted the need for restrictive legislation and how SB273 impacted subsequent pharmacy practice in WV. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 pharmacists who were practicing in counties that had been designated as high-prescribing counties based upon county-level prescribing/dispensing data from state records. Analysis of the interviews was informed by the methodological orientation of content analysis to identify emerging themes. RESULTS: Participants described confronting questionable opioid prescriptions, treatment costs, and insurance coverage driving opioids as a first-line choice for pain management, as well as the influence of corporate policies and the immense responsibility of being the "last line of defense" in the opioid crisis. A central impediment to the care of patients was the inability of the pharmacists to effectively communicate their concerns to prescribers, making improved prescriber-dispenser communication an essential next step in minimizing opioid care gaps. CONCLUSION: This is one of few qualitative studies that have explored pharmacists' experiences, perceptions, and role in the opioid crisis leading up to and during the enactment of a restrictive opioid prescribing law. In light of the difficulties they faced, a restrictive opioid prescribing law was viewed positively by pharmacists.

Hepatitis C antibody prevalence, correlates and barriers to care among people who inject drugs in Central California.

Hepatitis C (HCV) infection among people who inject drugs (PWID) is a major public health concern. We examined correlates of HCV antibody (anti-HCV) seropositivity and characteristics of prior HCV testing and treatment among PWID in Fresno, California, which has among the highest prevalence of injection drug use (IDU) in the United States. We surveyed 494 peer-recruited PWID (≥18 years of age) in 2016 about their experiences with HCV testing and treatment, and conducted HCV and HIV antibody testing for all participants. Bivariate analyses and multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify correlates of anti-HCV seropositivity. A majority (65%) tested positive for anti-HCV, with 32% of those being unaware of their HCV status. Anti-HCV seroprevalence was independently and positively associated with older age (AOR = 1.11 per year, 95% CI = 1.06, 1.17), years injecting (AOR = 1.08 per year, 95% CI = 1.03, 1.13), distributive syringe sharing (AOR = 2.76, 95% CI = 1.29, 5.94), having syringes confiscated by police (AOR = 2.65, 95% CI = 1.22, 5.74), ever trading sex (AOR = 3.51, 95% CI = 1.40, 8.81) and negatively associated with being Black/African American (non-Hispanic) (AOR = 0.06, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.47). Prior HCV testing was associated with older age, ever getting syringes from a syringe services program, and having interactions with police. For those aware of their anti-HCV seropositivity, only 11% had initiated treatment; reasons for not seeing a physician regarding diagnosis included not feeling sick (23%), currently using drugs/alcohol (19%) and not knowing where to go for HCV medical care (19%). Our findings highlight the importance of expanding community-based access to sterile syringes alongside HCV testing and treatment services, particularly at syringe service programs where PWID may be more comfortable seeking testing and treatment.

If we build it, will they come? Perspectives on pharmacy-based naloxone among family and friends of people who use opioids: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Expanding access to the opioid antagonist naloxone to reduce overdose mortality is a public health priority in the United States. Naloxone standing orders (NSOs) have been established in many states to increase naloxone dispensing at pharmacies, but increased pharmacy access does not ensure optimal uptake among those likely to witness an overdose. In a prior statewide purchase trial, we documented high levels of naloxone access at Massachusetts pharmacies under a statewide NSO. In this study, we characterize barriers to pharmacy-based naloxone uptake among potential opioid overdose "bystanders" (friends or family of people who use opioids) that may be amenable to intervention. METHODS: Eligible bystanders were Massachusetts residents ≥ 18 years of age, did not use illicit opioids in the past 30 days, and knew someone who currently uses illicit opioids. We used a sequential mixed methods approach, in which a series of semi-structured qualitative interviews (N = 22) were conducted April-July 2018, to inform the development of a subsequent quantitative survey (N = 260), conducted February-July 2020. RESULTS: Most survey participants (77%) reported ever obtaining naloxone but few (21%) attempted to purchase it at a pharmacy. Qualitative participants revealed that barriers to utilizing the NSO included low perceived risk of overdose, which was rooted in misconceptions regarding the risks of prescription opioid misuse, denial about their loved one's drug use, and drug use stereotypes; inaccurate beliefs about the impact of naloxone on riskier opioid use; and concerns regarding anticipated stigma and confidentiality. Many participants had engaged in mutual support groups, which served as a source of free naloxone for half (50%) of those who had ever obtained naloxone. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high levels of pharmacy naloxone access in Massachusetts, few bystanders in our study had attempted to obtain naloxone under the NSO. Low perceived risk of overdose, misinformation, stigma, and confidentiality were important barriers to pharmacy naloxone uptake, all of which are amenable to intervention. Support groups provided a setting for addressing stigma and misinformation and provided a discreet and comfortable setting for naloxone access. Where these groups do not exist and for bystanders who do not participate in such groups, pharmacies are well-positioned to fill gaps in naloxone availability.

Mobile phone and internet use among people who inject drugs: Implications for mobile health interventions.

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) interventions have the potential to improve substance use treatment engagement and outcomes, and to reduce risk behaviors among people who inject drugs (PWID). However, there are few studies assessing mobile technology use among PWID and none have investigated continuity of mobile phone use. Methods: We surveyed 494 PWID. We used bivariate (independent-sample t- and chi-square tests) and multivariate (logistic regression) analyses to determine whether mobile phone and/or internet use differed as a function of participant- and/or injection-related characteristics. Results: Most participants (77%) had a mobile phone, with 67% having a phone that was free of charge. Participants with a phone were significantly less likely to be homeless (AOR = 0.28), to have shared syringes (AOR = 0.53), and to have reused syringes (AOR = 0.26) in the past 3 months. We observed high rates of phone and number turnover, with more than half reporting that they got a new phone (57%) and/or number (56%) at least once within the past 3 months. Most participants were familiar with using the internet (80% ever use), though participants who had ever used the internet were younger (AOR = 0.89), were less likely to be homeless (AOR = 0.38), were less likely to have shared syringes (AOR = 0.49), and were more likely to have injected methamphetamine by itself (AOR = 2.49) in the past 3 months. Conclusions: Overall, mobile technology and internet use was high among our sample of PWID. Several factors should be considered in recruiting diverse samples of PWID to minimize bias in mHealth study outcomes, including mobile phone access and protocol type (text- vs internet-based).

Pharmacists' experiences with a statewide naloxone standing order program in Massachusetts: a mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVES: In a prior statewide naloxone purchase trial conducted in Massachusetts, we documented a high rate of naloxone dispensing under the state's standing order program. The purpose of this study was to understand the factors that facilitate naloxone access under the Massachusetts naloxone standing order (NSO) program and identify any remaining barriers amenable to intervention. DESIGN: Mixed methods design involving a pharmacist survey and 3 pharmacist focus groups. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Focus groups were conducted at 3 separate professional conferences for pharmacists (n = 27). The survey was conducted among Massachusetts pharmacists (n = 339) working at a stratified random sample chain and independent retail pharmacies across Massachusetts. All data were collected between September 2018 and November 2019. OUTCOME MEASURES: Facilitators and barriers to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing and pharmacists' attitudes and beliefs regarding naloxone and opioid use. RESULTS: Most pharmacists described NSO implementation as being straightforward, although differences were reported by pharmacy type in both the survey and focus groups. Facilitators included centralized implementation at chain pharmacies, access to Web-based resources, regularly stocking naloxone, and use of naloxone-specific intake forms. Barriers included patient confidentiality concerns and payment/cost issues. Only 31% of surveyed pharmacists reported always providing naloxone counseling; the most commonly cited barriers were perceived patient discomfort (21%) and time limitations (14%). Confidential space was also more of a concern for independent (vs. chain) pharmacists (18% vs. 6%, P = 0.008). A majority of pharmacists held supportive attitudes toward naloxone, although some reported having moral/ethical concerns about naloxone provision. CONCLUSION: We documented several facilitators to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing. Areas for improvement include addressing stigma and misconceptions around opioids and naloxone use. These remain important targets for improving pharmacy-based naloxone dispensing, although our overall positive results suggest Massachusetts' experience with NSO implementation can inform other states' efforts to expand pharmacy-based naloxone access.

Pharmacy naloxone codispensing: A mixed methods study of practices and perspectives under a statewide standing order program.

BACKGROUND: In a previous statewide naloxone purchase trial conducted in Massachusetts, we documented high levels of naloxone accessibility, upon patient request, under the state's naloxone standing order (NSO) program. Equally important for reducing overdose mortality rates is expanding naloxone access via codispensing alongside opioid prescription and syringe purchases at pharmacies. OBJECTIVE: To understand naloxone codispensing from the perspective of pharmacists under the Massachusetts NSO program. METHODS: The study used a mixed methods design involving 3 focus groups and a quantitative survey. Participants in both the focus groups (N = 27) and survey (N = 339) were licensed Massachusetts pharmacists. Focus groups were conducted at 3 separate professional conferences for pharmacists. The survey was conducted using a stratified random sample of 400 chain and independent retail pharmacies across Massachusetts. All data were collected between September 2018 and November 2019. Quantitative and qualitative analyses examined current policies, practices, and attitudes regarding naloxone codispensing for patients at risk of opioid overdose. RESULTS: Most pharmacists (69%) reported that they, their pharmacy, or both promoted codispensing alongside opioid prescriptions. A majority promoting naloxone codispensing did so for patients prescribed high opioid dosages (80%); fewer promoted codispensing for patients also prescribed benzodiazepines (20%). Facilitators to codispensing were pre-existing relationships between pharmacists and prescribers, mandatory pharmacist consultation, and universal naloxone promotion to all patients meeting certain criteria. Barriers to codispensing were pharmacists' concerns about offending patients by initiating a conversation about naloxone, insufficient technician training, workflow and resource constraints, and misconceptions surrounding naloxone. We found no substantive differences in outcomes between chain and independent pharmacies. CONCLUSION: We documented several facilitators and barriers to naloxone codispensing in Massachusetts pharmacies. Areas amenable to intervention include increased training for front-line pharmacy technicians, mandatory pharmacist consultation for opioid-prescribed patients, workflow reorganization, and addressing stigma concerns on the pharmacist end.

Consider the Source: Associations between Syringe Sources and Risky Injection Behaviors in California's Central Valley.

BACKGROUND: Sterile syringe access is critical to prevent serious viral and bacterial infections among people who inject drugs (PWID) but many areas across the United States lack sufficient access. Although California law allows nonprescription pharmacy syringe sales and syringe services programs (SSPs), access gaps remain in the largely rural Central Valley. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine syringe access and related injection behaviors among PWID in Fresno, California. METHODS: We used respondent driven sampling to recruit 494 individuals for a survey about syringe access and injection behaviors between April and September 2016. Participants were ≥18 years old and injected at least twice in the past 30 days. Descriptive statistics examined syringe access and logistic regression determined if discrete syringe source categories were significantly associated with syringe sharing and/or reuse. RESULTS: A majority (67%) obtained syringes from an authorized source; SSPs were most common (59%), while few reported pharmacy purchase (14%). Unauthorized sources were even more common (79%), primarily friends (64%) or someone on the street (37%). Compared to PWID who used only authorized sources, those using only unauthorized sources had a higher odds of syringe sharing (AOR = 3.40, 95% CI: 1.66, 6.95) and syringe reuse (AOR = 6.22; 95% CI: 2.24, 17.29), as did those who reported mixed sources (AOR = 3.78; 95% CI: 1.90, 7.54 and AOR = 4.64; 95% CI: 2.08, 10.35). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate a need to expand syringe access in nonurban California to prevent the syringe sharing and reuse that contributes to serious viral and bacterial infections among PWID.

System-level factors shaping the implementation of "hub and spoke" systems to expand MOUD in rural areas.

Background: Hub and spoke systems (HSS) are increasingly promoted as a systems-level intervention to expand access to medication for opioid use disorders (MOUD), particularly in rural areas with limited treatment options. The HSS model consists of sub-systems in which "hubs" deliver specialized expertise to a regional network of office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) providers in "spokes," who together create a continuum of acute and chronic care. Yet, little is known about system-level factors (e.g., system structure, financing) that influence HSS implementation and sustainability in rural areas. Methods: For this case study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with substance use disorder treatment providers (N = 26) and system-level stakeholders (N = 16) in five rural HSS sub-systems throughout one state. We undertook iterative textual analysis of interview transcripts, identifying and coding themes related to key implementation constructs associated with the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainability (EPIS) framework. Results: California policy-makers adopted HSS to expand rural access to opioid treatment programs (OTPs, i.e., providers of methadone and other medications for opioid use disorder). However, stakeholders questioned the model's fit for rural regions featuring few established OTPs that could function as hubs and critiqued its treatment-focused approach, felt to sideline harm reduction service providers. Contracts to serve rural regions were awarded entirely to for-profit methadone providers, contributing to stigma and distrust among many buprenorphine providers whose organizations were later recruited as spokes. While hubs offered financial resources enabling some spokes to expand MOUD, the needs of spokes varied considerably. Relationships between hubs and spokes to facilitate the care continuum under HSS were restricted by limited behavioral health resources and the large distances characterizing rural California. Conclusions: This case study reveals how rural contextual factors such as geography and behavioral healthcare resource availability can dramatically influence differential HSS implementation.

Assessing pharmacy-based naloxone access using an innovative purchase trial methodology.

OBJECTIVES: Massachusetts was among the first states to allow standing orders to facilitate pharmacy-based naloxone purchases and reduce opioid overdose deaths. We conducted a unique purchase trial to establish a valid measure of standing order naloxone in Massachusetts, using purchasers from 2 high priority populations to determine whether naloxone is less accessible to those who use illicit opioids than other potential purchasers. DESIGN: Purchase trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study used a stratified random sample of 200 chain and independent retail pharmacies across Massachusetts. Each pharmacy underwent 2 purchase attempts-1 by a person who used illicit opioids (PWUIO) and 1 by a potential bystander who did not use illicit opioids but had a relationship with someone at risk of opioid overdose. OUTCOME MEASURE: Successful or unsuccessful naloxone purchase attempt. RESULTS: Overall, 322 of 397 purchase attempts (81%) were successful, with no statistically significant difference between PWUIO and bystanders (P = 0.221). Most purchases (93%) resulted in the acquisition of single-step nasal naloxone (Narcan; median cost $133.38). Forty percent of the purchases included state-mandated verbal counseling, and PWUIO were significantly less likely to receive counseling than bystanders (30% vs. 51%, P < 0.001). Common reasons for failed purchase were not stocking naloxone (47%), price > $150 (25%), and requiring a prescription (15%). Chain pharmacies were significantly more likely to sell naloxone than independent pharmacies (86% vs. 53%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We documented high levels of naloxone access for both PWUIO and bystanders, suggesting Massachusetts could serve as a model for states seeking to improve pharmacy-based naloxone access. Additional implementation efforts should focus on expanding availability at independent pharmacies and supporting pharmacies in proactively offering naloxone to PWUIO and other high-risk individuals.

Opioid-Related Outcomes in West Virginia, 2008-2016.

OBJECTIVES: To examine opioid-related outcomes by using hospitalization and mortality data as an indicator of the current opioid crisis in West Virginia. METHODS: We used data from the West Virginia University Medicine health care system to examine the trend in opioid overdoses and percentage of patients with a repeat overdose from 2008 to 2016. We obtained the opioid overdose death rate for the state from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention WONDER (Wide-ranging ONline Data for Epidemiologic Research) mortality data for 2008 to 2016. RESULTS: The hospitalization rate for opioid overdoses increased (13%) on average each year in a similar fashion to the opioid overdose death rate for the state (12%) between 2008 and 2016. During the same time, the percentage of patients with a repeat opioid overdose increased annually by 13% on average. CONCLUSIONS: There continues to be a surge of opioid overdoses in West Virginia. These findings suggest a need to amplify comprehensive prevention and treatment efforts throughout the state. Public health initiatives to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with overdoses should consider how the changes in potency may be influencing these outcomes.

Self-reported participation in voluntary nonprescription syringe sales in California's Central Valley.

OBJECTIVES: California Senate Bill 41 (SB41), effective January 2012, is a human immunodeficiency virus/hepatitis C virus prevention measure designed to expand syringe access among injection drug users (IDUs) by allowing pharmacies to sell syringes without a prescription. This study assesses self-reported implementation of SB41 and characterizes barriers amenable to intervention. DESIGN: Interviewer-administered survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Fresno and Kern Counties, CA. Pharmacists and other pharmacy staff (n = 404) at 212 pharmacies. OUTCOME MEASURE: Self-reported nonprescription pharmacy sales to known or suspected IDUs. RESULTS: Overall, 29.3% of participants said their pharmacy would sell nonprescription syringes to a known or suspected IDU, whereas a far higher proportion (79.3%) would sell nonprescription syringes to a person with diabetes. More than one-half said that their pharmacy requires nonprescription syringe purchasers to enter their signature and name and address in a log book although that is not required under SB41. Fewer than 2 out of 3 participants (61.1%) knew that it is legal to sell nonprescription syringes to IDUs. That knowledge, as well as having syringe sales practices based on both store policy and discretion, were positively associated with IDU syringe sales after controlling for other factors. Working at an independent pharmacy, agreeing that only people with "medical conditions" such as diabetes should be able to buy syringes, and viewing syringe sales to IDUs as "not good business" were independently but negatively associated with IDU syringe sales. CONCLUSION: This study complements an earlier syringe purchase trial documenting low participation in voluntary nonprescription syringe sales under SB41 in Fresno and Kern Counties. In the absence of legislation requiring mandatory syringe sales, interventions should be developed to increase knowledge of the law and frame addiction as a medical condition, with a special focus on independent pharmacies. Informational interventions should stress the need to eliminate log book documentation requirements, which may serve as a barrier to IDU purchase.

Nonprescription syringe sales: a missed opportunity for HIV prevention in California.

OBJECTIVE: To assess implementation of California Senate Bill SB41 in two inland California counties where prevalence of injection drug use is among the highest in the nation. DESIGN: Syringe purchase trial. SETTING: Fresno and Kern counties, California. PARTICIPANTS: All 248 community pharmacies in the counties. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Successful or unsuccessful syringe purchase attempt. RESULTS: Only 52 (21.0%) syringe purchase attempts were successful. The proportion of successful attempts did not vary by county or by data collector ethnicity. The most common reasons for unsuccessful syringe purchase attempts were prescription requirements (45.7%), the requested syringe size was not available (10.7%), and the pharmacy did not sell syringes (9.7%). In addition, some syringe purchase attempts (4.1%) were unsuccessful because the data collector was asked to purchase more syringes than allowed by law. Although 80% and 78% of Fresno and Kern residents, respectively, live within a 5-minute drive of a community pharmacy, less than one-half live within a 5-minute drive of a community pharmacy that sold syringes. CONCLUSION: SB41 has not resulted in broad pharmacy-based syringe access in California's inland counties, where a disproportionate number of cases of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections are associated with injection drug use. Additional steps by legislative bodies, regulatory agencies, and professional organizations are needed to actively engage pharmacies in expanding nonprescription syringe sales to reduce HIV transmission among injection drug users.

Pharmacies as providers of expanded health services for people who inject drugs: a review of laws, policies, and barriers in six countries.

BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs (PWID) are underserved by health providers but pharmacies may be their most accessible care settings. METHODS: Studies in the U.S., Russia, Vietnam, China, Canada and Mexico employed a three-level (macro-, meso-, and micro-) model to assess feasibility of expanded pharmacy services for PWID. Studies employed qualitative and quantitative interviews, review of legal and policy documents, and information on the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of key stakeholders. RESULTS: Studies produced a mixed assessment of feasibility. Provision of information and referrals by pharmacies is permissible in all study sites and sale and safe disposal of needles/syringes by pharmacies is legal in almost all sites, although needle/syringe sales face challenges related to attitudes and practices of pharmacists, police, and other actors. Pharmacy provision of HIV testing, hepatitis vaccination, opioid substitution treatment, provision of naloxone for drug overdose, and abscess treatment, face more serious legal and policy barriers. DISCUSSION: Challenges to expanded services for drug users in pharmacies exist at all three levels, especially the macro-level characterized by legal barriers and persistent stigmatization of PWID. Where deficiencies in laws, policies, and community attitudes block implementation, stakeholders should advocate for needed legal and policy changes and work to address community stigma and resistance. Laws and policies are only as good as their implementation, so attention is also needed to meso- and micro- levels. Policies, attitudes, and practices of police departments and pharmacy chains as well as knowledge, attitudes, and practices of individual PWID, individual pharmacies, and police officers should support rather than undermine positive laws and expanded services. Despite the challenges, pharmacies remain potentially important venues for delivering health services to PWID.

Opioid Prescribing Patterns After Imposition of Setting-Specific Limits on Prescription Duration.

Importance: Despite their widespread adoption across the US, policies imposing one-size-fits-all limits on the duration of prescriptions for opioids have shown modest and mixed implications for prescribing. Objective: To assess whether a prescription duration limit policy tailored to different clinical settings was associated with shorter opioid prescription lengths. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study examined changes in opioid prescribing patterns for opioid-naive Medicaid enrollees aged 12 to 64 years before and after implementation of a statewide prescription duration limit policy in West Virginia in June 2018. Patients with cancer or Medicare coverage were excluded. The policy assigned a 7-day duration limit to opioid prescriptions for adults treated in outpatient hospital- or office-based practices, a 4-day limit for adults treated in emergency departments, and a 3-day limit for pediatric patients younger than 18 years regardless of clinical setting. Data were examined from January 1, 2017, through September 30, 2019, and data were analyzed from June 12 to October 30, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Whether a patient's initial opioid prescription was longer in days than the June 2018 policy limit for a given care setting before and after policy implementation. Interrupted time series models were used to calculate the association between the policy's implementation and outcomes. Results: The analytic sample included 44 703 Medicaid enrollees (27 957 patients [62.5%] before policy implementation and 16 746 patients [37.5%] after policy implementation; mean [SD] age, 33.9 [13.4] years; 27 461 females [61.4%]). Among adults treated in outpatient hospital- or office-based settings, the duration limit policy was associated with a decrease of 8.83 (95% CI, -10.43 to -7.23) percentage points (P < .001), or a 56.8% relative reduction, in the proportion of prescriptions exceeding the 7-day limit. In the emergency department setting, the policy was associated with a decrease of 7.03 (95% CI, -10.38 to -3.68) percentage points (P < .001), a 37.5% relative reduction, in the proportion of prescriptions exceeding the 4-day limit. The proportion of pediatric opioid prescriptions longer than the 3-day limit decreased by 12.80 (95% CI, -17.31 to -8.37) percentage points (P < .001), a 26.5% relative reduction, after the policy's implementation. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cross-sectional study suggest that opioid prescription duration limits tailored to different clinical settings are associated with reduced length of prescriptions for opioid-naive patients. Additional research is needed to evaluate whether these limits are associated with reductions in the incidence of opioid use disorder or with unintended consequences, such as shifts to illicit opioids.

Back Pain in the Era of Opioid Restriction and Implications for Neurosurgeons Based on Qualitative Findings From a Rural State.

Historically, back pain has been an inciting complaint for the initiation of opioids. Aggressive marketing of opioids to treat back pain coupled with the initiation of pain being treated as "the fifth vital sign" contributed to the emerging opioid crisis in the USA. West Virginia (WV) has long been considered the epicenter of the crisis. In 2018, the WV legislature passed a bill that placed prescribing limits on opioids. Our group set out to investigate the impacts of opioid prescribing restrictions through a sequential, mixed methods study evaluating prescription trends and stakeholder experiences. These stakeholder experiences generated emergent themes regarding the evolution of the opioid crisis up to and beyond the implementation of the bill, which is of relevance to neurosurgeons and back pain treatment. This study explores those findings for a neurosurgical audience. This study consisted of open-ended, semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 50 physicians, pharmacists, and patients in WV. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Content analysis was utilized as the methodological orientation. Five theoretical domains relevant to the treatment of back pain emerged, describing the prevalence of opioid use, barriers to access care, the importance of opioids for function in resource-poor rural areas, disconnected and siloed care, and patient views on the impacts of pain care gaps and solutions. Spinal pain care in rural WV is complex due to identified challenges. Care siloing factors in suboptimal spinal pain care. Future work should define, implement, and assess the real-world effectiveness of treatment paradigms for the full spectrum of surgical and non-surgical back pain complaints. Neurosurgeons should be present in this arena.

A Mind-Body Intervention to Improve Physical Activity for Patients with Chronic Hip-Related Pain: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Pain and dysfunction persist for most patients following hip-related pain treatment. Additionally, individuals with hip-related pain are typically less physically active than individuals without hip pain, despite evidence that regular physical activity reduces chronic musculoskeletal pain. Poor psychological health is common in patients with hip-related pain and further reinforces low physical activity. Mind-body interventions can improve psychological health and activity levels but have yet to be integrated to provide comprehensive, psychologically informed care for patients with hip-related pain. Thus, we are using the NCCIH intervention development framework to develop Helping Improve PSychological Health (HIPS), a novel, multimodal mind-body intervention to improve physical activity for individuals with hip-related pain and poor psychological health. METHODS: We will recruit physical therapists (N = 20) and patients with hip-related pain (N = 20) to participate in 60 min qualitative interviews (focus groups with therapists; one-on-one interviews with patients). Using these data, we will develop the initial HIPS intervention and provider training materials. One physical therapist will be trained to deliver the HIPS intervention to five participants in an open pilot trial. Participants will attend six 30 min HIPS intervention sessions. We will collect quantitative data on satisfaction, improvement, and physical activity, alongside qualitative exit interviews with participants and the physical therapist in order to refine the HIPS intervention and provider training materials. RESULTS: This study has been approved by the MGB IRB. We aim to develop and test the initial feasibility of the HIPS intervention in an open pilot trial. The findings from this project will inform a subsequent feasibility RCT.

Drug treatment perspectives and experiences among family and friends of people who use illicit opioids: A mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is key to reducing opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Family and close friends of people with OUD can play an important role in motivating and facilitating their loved ones' treatment. We examined evolving knowledge about OUD and its treatment among family and close friends of people who use illicit opioids and their experiences navigating the treatment system. METHODS: Eligible individuals were Massachusetts residents, ≥18 years of age, did not use illicit opioids in the past 30 days, and had a close relationship with someone who currently uses illicit opioids. Recruitment leveraged a nonprofit support network for family members of persons with a substance use disorder (SUD). We used a sequential mixed methods approach, in which a series of semi-structured qualitative interviews (N = 22, April-July 2018) informed the development of a quantitative survey (N = 260, February-July 2020). Attitudes and experiences related to OUD treatment constituted an emergent theme in qualitative interviews, which informed a section of the subsequent survey. RESULTS: Both qualitative and quantitative data indicated support groups were instrumental in increasing OUD knowledge and influencing attitudes toward treatment options. Regarding how best to motivate drug treatment engagement, some participants favored what they referred to as a "tough love" approach that typically included a preference for abstinence-based treatment, while others favored a positive reinforcement approach focused on enhancing treatment motivation. Loved ones' treatment preferences and scientific evidence played a minor role in determining preferred treatment modalities, and only 38 % of survey participants believed that using medications for OUD is more effective than treatment without medications. A majority (57 %) agreed that finding a drug treatment slot or bed was either somewhat or very difficult, and that once in the system treatment was costly and involved multiple returns to treatment after relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Support groups appear to be important forums for gaining knowledge about OUD, negotiating strategies to motivate their loved ones' entry into treatment, and forming preferences for treatment modalities. Participants emphasized the influence of other group members more so than their loved ones' preferences or empirical evidence of effectiveness with regard to choosing treatment programs and approaches.

Civil commitment perspectives and experiences among friends and family of people who use illicit opioids in Massachusetts, USA.

BACKGROUND: Civil commitment statutes allow qualified individuals to petition for court-mandated commitment for someone with a substance use disorder (SUD). Despite a lack of empirical evidence showing efficacy of involuntary commitment, these statutes are prevalent worldwide. We examined perspectives on civil commitment among family members and close friends of people who use illicit opioids in Massachusetts, U.S.A. METHODS: Eligible individuals were Massachusetts residents, ≥18 years of age, did not use illicit opioids but had a close relationship with someone who did. We used a sequential mixed methods approach in which semi-structured interviews (N=22) were followed by a quantitative survey (N=260). Thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative data and survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: While some family members were influenced by SUD professionals to petition for civil commitment, influence from social networks based on personal experience was more common. Motivations for civil commitment included initiating recovery and believing that commitment would reduce overdose risk. Some reported that it afforded them respite from caring for, and worrying about, their loved one. A minority discussed increases in overdose risk following a period of forced abstinence. Participants expressed concerns about the variable quality of care during commitment, largely based on the use of corrections facilities for civil commitment in Massachusetts. A minority endorsed the use of these facilities for civil commitment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite participants' uncertainty and the harms stemming from civil commitment, including increased risk of overdose after forced abstinence and the use of corrections facilities, family members resorted to this mechanism to reduce immediate overdose risk. Our findings indicate that peer support groups are an appropriate forum to disseminate information about evidenced-based treatment and that family members and others close to those with SUD often lack adequate support for, and respite from, the stress of caring for them.