Patient-Centered Outcomes Associated With a Novel Office-Based Opioid Treatment Program in a District Health Department: Mixed Methods Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Granville and Vance counties have some of the highest opioid-related death rates in North Carolina, and have significant unmet needs with regard to opioid treatment. Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is the most effective evidence-based approach to address opioid use disorder. Despite demonstrated efficacy and substantial need, access to MOUD is still insufficient in many parts of the United States. In order to connect patients with needed MOUD services, the district health department, Granville Vance Public Health (GVPH), established an office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) program. OBJECTIVE: In this formative pilot study, we sought to describe patients' goals and outcomes in a program delivered at a rural local health department using an integrated care approach. METHODS: We used a mixed methods concurrent nested research design. The primary method of investigation was one-on-one qualitative interviews with active OBOT patients (n=7) focused on patients' goals and perceived impacts of the program. Trained interviewers followed a semistructured interview guide developed iteratively by the study team. The secondary method was a descriptive quantitative analysis (79 patients; 1478 visits over 2.5 years) of treatment retention and patient-reported outcomes (anxiety and depression). RESULTS: Participants in the OBOT program were 39.6 years of age on average, and 25.3% (20/79) were uninsured. The average retention in the program was 18.4 months. The proportion of individuals in the program with moderate to severe depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores ≥10) decreased between program initiation (66%, 23/35) and at the most recent assessment (34%, 11/32). In qualitative interviews, participants credited the OBOT program for reducing or stopping the use of opioids and other substances (eg, marijuana, cocaine, and benzodiazepines). Many participants noted how the program helped them manage withdrawal symptoms and cravings, which helped them feel more in control of their use. Participants also attributed improvements in quality of life to the OBOT program, such as improved relationships with loved ones, improved mental and physical health, and improved financial stability. CONCLUSIONS: Initial data show promising patient outcomes for active GVPH OBOT participants, including reduction in opioid use and improvements in quality of life. As a pilot study, a limitation of this study is a lack of a comparison group. However, this formative project demonstrates promising patient-centered outcome improvements for GVPH OBOT participants.

Leveraging Policy Changes Made in Response to COVID-19 to Advance Telehealth and Novel Treatment Approaches for People Who Use Opioids: Qualitative Perspectives From Two Rural North Carolina Counties.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has been a catalyst for telehealth services for people who use opioids; however, the data show dramatic increases in opioid overdose deaths and ongoing lack of treatment options in North Carolina, particularly among rural residents. Methods: We conducted a listening session and qualitative interviews with 10 health care professionals, administrators, and community partners providing services for individuals who use opioids in Granville and Vance counties. Data were analyzed with an applied thematic approach. Results: Participants described several benefits of rapid expansion of telehealth services during the pandemic. Continued improvements in access to high-speed internet will be critical to maintain progress in rural areas. Participants advocated for integrated, co-located ser-vices and improved referral processes to minimize cost and burden of attending multiple appointments across sites. Integrated services could include medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), mental/behavioral health support, primary medical care, and harm reduction services. Participants supported novel community-based strategies, such as mobile clinics, and described a need for after-hours and crisis services for opioid recovery in the region. Limitations: The study was exploratory in nature and elicited the perspectives of providers serving two rural counties in North Carolina, which may not be generalizable to broader populations. We did not include the perspectives of people who use opioids in this study but will do so in upcoming research. Conclusions: Participants were strong proponents of the benefits of telehealth and identified strategies for continuing recent progress in rural access to opioid treatment through novel integrated and community-based approaches.