Prescribing Medications for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Qualitative Study of Primary Care Physician Decision Making.

PURPOSE: Over 29 million Americans have alcohol use disorder (AUD). Though there are effective medications for AUD (MAUD) that can be prescribed within primary care, they are underutilized. We aimed to explore how primary care physicians familiar with MAUD make prescribing decisions and to identify reasons for underuse of MAUD within primary care. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 19 primary care physicians recruited from a large online database of medical professionals. Physicians had to have started a patient on MAUD within the last 6 months in an outpatient setting. Inductive and deductive thematic analysis was informed by the theory of planned behavior. RESULTS: Physicians endorsed that it is challenging to prescribe MAUD due to several reasons, including: (1) somewhat negative personal beliefs about medication effectiveness and likelihood of patient adherence; (2) competing demands in primary care that make MAUD a lower priority; and, (3) few positive subjective norms around prescribing. To make MAUD prescribing a smaller component of their practice, physicians reported applying various rules of thumb to select patients for MAUD. These included recommending MAUD to the patients who seemed the most motivated to reduce drinking, those with the most severe AUD, and those who were also receiving other treatments for AUD. CONCLUSIONS: There is a challenging implementation context for MAUD due to competing demands within primary care. Future research should explore which strategies for identifying a subset of patients for MAUD are the most appropriate and most likely to improve population health and health equity.

Financial Sustainability of Novel Delivery Models in Behavioral Health Treatment.

BACKGROUND: In the US, much of the research into new intervention and delivery models for behavioral health care is funded by research institutes and foundations, typically through grants to develop and test the new interventions. The original grant funding is typically time-limited. This implies that eventually communities, clinicians, and others must find resources to replace the grant funding -otherwise the innovation will not be adopted. Diffusion is challenged by the continued dominance in the US of fee-for-service reimbursement, especially for behavioral health care. AIMS: To understand the financial challenges to disseminating innovative behavioral health delivery models posed by fee-for-service reimbursement, and to explore alternative payment models that promise to accelerate adoption by better addressing need for flexibility and sustainability. METHODS: We review US experience with three specific novel delivery models that emerged in recent years. The models are: collaborative care model for depression (CoCM), outpatient based opioid treatment (OBOT), and the certified community behavioral health clinic (CCBHC) model. These examples were selected as illustrating some common themes and some different issues affecting diffusion. For each model, we discuss its core components; evidence on its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; how its dissemination was funded; how providers are paid; and what has been the uptake so far. RESULTS: The collaborative care model has existed for longest, but has been slow to disseminate, due in part to a lack of billing codes for key components until recently. The OBOT model faced that problem, and also (until recently) a regulatory requirement requiring physicians to obtain federal waivers in order to prescribe buprenorphine. Similarly, the CCBHC model includes previously nonbillable services, but it appears to be diffusing more successfully than some other innovations, due in part to the approach taken by funders. DISCUSSION: A common challenge for all three models has been their inclusion of services that were not (initially) reimbursable in a fee-for-service system. However, even establishing new procedure codes may not be enough to give providers the flexibility needed to implement these models, unless payers also implement alternative payment models. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: For providers who receive time-limited grant funding to implement these novel delivery models, one key lesson is the need to start early on planning how services will be sustained after the grant ends. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: For research funders (e.g., federal agencies), it is clearly important to speed up the process of obtaining coverage for each novel delivery model, including the development of new billable service codes, and to plan for this as early as possible. Funders also need to collaborate with providers early in the grant period on sustainability planning for the post-grant environment. For payers, a key lesson is the need to fold novel models into stable existing funding streams such as Medicaid and commercial insurance coverage, rather than leaving them at the mercy of revolving time-limited grants, and to provide pathways for contracting for innovations under new payment models. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: For researchers, a key recommendation would be to pay greater attention to the payment environment when designing new delivery models and interventions.

Opioid use disorder Cascade of care framework design: A roadmap.

Unintentional overdose deaths, most involving opioids, have eclipsed all other causes of US deaths for individuals less than 50 years of age. An estimated 2.4 to 5 million individuals have opioid use disorder (OUD) yet a minority receive treatment in a given year. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are the gold standard treatment for OUD however early dropout remains a major challenge for improving clinical outcomes. A Cascade of Care (CoC) framework, first popularized as a public health accountability strategy to stem the spread of HIV, has been adapted specifically for OUD. The CoC framework has been promoted by the NIH and several states and jurisdictions for organizing quality improvement efforts through clinical, policy, and administrative levers to improve OUD treatment initiation and retention. This roadmap details CoC design domains based on available data and potential linkages as individual state agencies and health systems typically rely on limited datasets subject to diverse legal and regulatory requirements constraining options for evaluations. Both graphical decision trees and catalogued studies are provided to help guide efforts by state agencies and health systems to improve data collection and monitoring efforts under the OUD CoC framework.

Evaluating the feasibility and impact of case rate payment for recovery support navigator services: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Acute 24-h detoxification services (detox) are necessary but insufficient for many individuals working towards long-term recovery from opiate, alcohol or other drug addiction. Longer engagement in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment can lead to better health outcomes and reductions in overall healthcare costs. Connecting individuals with post-detox SUD treatment and supportive services is a vital next step. Toward this end, the Massachusetts Medicaid program reimburses Community Support Program staff (CSPs) to facilitate these connections. CSP support services are typically paid on a units-of-service basis. As part of a larger study testing health care innovations, one large Medicaid insurer developed a new cadre of workers, called Recovery Support Navigators (RSNs). RSNs performed similar tasks to CSPs but received more extensive training and coaching and were paid an experimental case rate (a flat negotiated reimbursement). This sub-study evaluates the feasibility and impact of case rate payments for RSN services as compared to CSP services paid fee-for-service. METHODS: We analyzed claims data and RSN service data for a segment of the Massachusetts Medicaid population who had more than one detox admission in the last year and also engaged in post-discharge CSP or RSN services. Qualitative data from key informant interviews and Learning Collaboratives with CSPs and RSNs supplemented the findings. RESULTS: Clients receiving RSN services under the case rate utilized the service significantly longer than clients receiving CSP services under unit-based billing. This resulted in a lower average cost per member per month for RSN clients. However, when calculating total SUD treatment costs per member, RSN client costs were 50% higher than CSP client costs. Provider organizations employing RSNs successfully implemented case rate billing. Benefits included allowing time for outreach efforts and training and coaching, activities not paid under the unit-based system. Yet, RSNs identified staffing and larger systems level challenges to consider when using a case rate payment model. CONCLUSIONS: Addiction is a chronic disease that requires long-term investments. Case rate billing offers a promising option for payers and providers as it promotes continued engagement with service providers. To fully realize the benefits of case rate billing, however, larger systems level changes are needed.

Cost Savings from a Navigator Intervention for Repeat Detoxification Clients.

BACKGROUND: Many clients with substance use disorders (SUD) have multiple admissions to a 24-hour level of care for detoxification without ever progressing to SUD treatment. In the US, health insurers have become concerned about the high costs and ineffective results of repeat detox admissions. For other diseases, health systems increasingly target high-risk, high-cost patients with individually tailored interventions delivered by `navigators' who help patients negotiate the complex health care system. Patient incentives are another increasingly common intervention. AIMS OF THE STUDY: (i) To examine how health care spending was affected by an intervention intended to improve entry to SUD treatment among clients who had multiple detox admissions. (ii) To see whether spending effects, overall and by type of service, differed by intervention arm. (iii) To assess whether the intervention resulted in net savings from the payer perspective, after subtracting implementation costs. METHODS: The intervention was implemented in a segment of the Massachusetts Medicaid population, and used Recovery Support Navigators (RSNs) who were trained to effectively engage and connect clients with SUD to follow-up care and community resources. Services were funded using a flat daily rate per client. Additionally, in one of the two intervention arms, clients were offered successive incentive payments for meeting pre-specified milestones to reinforce recovery-oriented behaviors. For this paper, multivariate analyses of claims and administrative data were used to measure the intervention's effect on health care spending, and to estimate net savings to the payer. RESULTS: Health care spending grew 1.6 percentage points more slowly for intervention-enrolled members than for others, implying gross savings of $68 per member per month. After subtracting intervention-related costs, net savings were estimated at $57 per member per month. The intervention was also associated with shifts in the health care service mix from more to less acute settings. DISCUSSION: While the results for total spending did not reach statistical significance, they suggest some potential for insurers to reduce the health care costs associated with repeat detox utilization by using a navigator-based intervention. Analyses reported elsewhere found that this intervention had favorable effects on rates of initiation of SUD treatment. Limitations of the study include the fact that neither subjects nor sites were randomized between study groups; lack of data on crime or productivity outcomes; low participant use of RSN services; and a policy change which altered the participant pool and truncated follow-up for some. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: These results suggest some potential for payers to reduce the health care costs associated with repeat detox by using a navigator-based intervention. To the extent that this results in shifting resources from repeat detox to actual treatment, the result should provide longer term benefit to the population coping with SUD. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: These results may encourage Medicaid and other payers to further experiment with similar interventions using navigators to decrease health care costs and improved the lives of SUD patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: It could be informative to test similar navigator interventions for detox patients in other settings where enrollment periods are longer.

The importance of identification when measuring performance in addiction treatment.

Background: Identifying and effectively treating individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs) is an important priority for state Medicaid programs, given the enormous toll that SUDs take on individuals, their families, and their communities. In this paper, we describe how the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measure "Identification of Alcohol and Other Drug Services" can be used, along with eligible population prevalence rates, to expand states' ability to track how well their Medicaid programs identify enrollees with SUDs and link them with treatment (measured by initiation and engagement performance measures). Methods: We use the 2009 Medicaid MAX data on utilization and enrollment along with information from the National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) to obtain state-level estimates of alcohol and drug abuse and dependence among Medicaid beneficiaries for 7 illustrative states. We calculate identification, initiation, and engagement measures using specifications from the National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA). Results: NSDUH data showed that the eligible population prevalence rate (the average rate of alcohol or drug abuse or dependence) among the 7 states was 10.0%, whereas the average identification rate was 2.9%. The gap between the prevalence and identification rates ranged from 5.1% to 11.0% among the 7 states. The initiation rates ranged from 36.9% to 57.1%. The states' engagement rates ranged from 11.8% to 31.1%, although rates differ by age, gender, and race/ethnicity in some states. Conclusion: Including identification along with initiation and engagement measures allows states to determine how well they are performing in a more complete spectrum from need, to recognition and documentation of enrollees with SUDs, to initiation of treatment, to continuation of early treatment.

Implementing single-item screening for drug use in a Veterans Health Administration outpatient setting.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy drug use is a concern in many settings, including military and veteran populations. In 2013, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical center in Bedford, Massachusetts, started requiring routine screening for unhealthy drug use in outpatient primary care and mental health settings, using a validated single question. METHODS: This study used descriptive and multivariable analyses of VHA electronic records for patients eligible for the screening program (N = 16,118). The study assessed first-year rates and predictors of screening and of positive screens, both for drug use and for unhealthy alcohol use, for which screening was already required. RESULTS: During the first year, 70% of patients were screened for unhealthy drug use and 84% were screened for unhealthy alcohol use. In multivariable analyses, screening for drug use was more likely for patients who had 8 or more days with VHA visits or were aged 40 or over. Patients with a prior drug use disorder diagnosis were much less likely to be screened. Three percent of patients screened for unhealthy drug use had a positive screen, and 14% of those screened for unhealthy alcohol use had a positive screen. Strong predictors of a positive drug use screen included a prior-year diagnosis of drug use disorder, any mental health clinic visits, younger age, or being unmarried. CONCLUSIONS: The drug screening initiative was relatively successful in its first-year implementation, having screened 70% of eligible subjects. However, it failed to screen many of those most likely to screen positive, thereby missing many opportunities to address unhealthy drug use. Future refinements should include better training clinicians in how to ask sensitive questions and how to address positive screens.

The Role of Health Plans in Supporting Behavioral Health Integration.

Health plan policies can influence delivery of integrated behavioral health and general medical care. This study provides national estimates for the prevalence of practices used by health plans that may support behavioral health integration. Results indicate that health plans employ financing and other policies likely to support integration. They also directly provide services that facilitate integration. Behavioral health contracting arrangements are associated with use of these policies. Delivery of integrated care requires systemic changes by both providers and payers thus health plans are key players in achieving this goal.

Combat-Acquired Traumatic Brain Injury, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, and Their Relative Associations With Postdeployment Binge Drinking.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether experiencing a traumatic brain injury (TBI) on a recent combat deployment was associated with postdeployment binge drinking, independent of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). METHODS: Using the 2008 Department of Defense Survey of Health Related Behaviors among Active Duty Military Personnel, an anonymous survey completed by 28 546 personnel, the study sample included 6824 personnel who had a combat deployment in the past year. Path analysis was used to examine whether PTSD accounted for the total association between TBI and binge drinking. MAIN MEASURES: The dependent variable, binge drinking days, was an ordinal measure capturing the number of times personnel drank 5+ drinks on one occasion (4+ for women) in the past month. Traumatic brain injury level captured the severity of TBI after a combat injury event exposure: TBI-AC (altered consciousness only), TBI-LOC of 20 or less (loss of consciousness up to 20 minutes), and TBI-LOC of more than 20 (loss of consciousness >20 minutes). A PTSD-positive screen relied on the standard diagnostic cutoff of 50+ on the PTSD Checklist-Civilian. RESULTS: The final path model found that while the direct effect of TBI (0.097) on binge drinking was smaller than that of PTSD (0.156), both were significant. Almost 70% of the total effect of TBI on binge drinking was from the direct effect; only 30% represented the indirect effect through PTSD. CONCLUSION: Further research is needed to replicate these findings and to understand the underlying mechanisms that explain the relationship between TBI and increased postdeployment drinking.

Admissions to detoxification after treatment: Does engagement make a difference?

BACKGROUND: Treatment engagement is a well-established performance measure for the treatment of substance use disorders. This study examined whether outpatient treatment engagement is associated with a reduced likelihood of subsequent detoxification admissions. METHODS: This study used administrative data on treatment services received by clients in specialty treatment facilities licensed in Massachusetts. The sample consisted of 11,591 adult clients who began an outpatient treatment episode in 2006. Treatment engagement was defined as receipt of at least 1 treatment service within 14 days of beginning a new outpatient treatment episode and receipt of at least 2 additional treatment services in the next 30 days. The outcome was a subsequent detoxification admission. Multilevel survival models examined the relationship between engagement and outcomes, with time to detoxification admission as the dependent variable censored at 365 days. RESULTS: Only 35% of clients met the outpatient engagement criteria, and 15% of clients had a detoxification admission within a year after beginning their outpatient treatment episode. Controlling for client demographics, insurance type, and substance use severity, clients who met the engagement criteria had a lower hazard of having a detoxification admission during the year following the index outpatient visit than those who did not engage (hazard ratio = 0.87, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment engagement is a useful measure for monitoring quality of care. The findings from this study could help inform providers and policy makers on ways to target care and reduce the likelihood of more intensive services.

Race/ethnicity and quality indicators for outpatient treatment for substance use disorders.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Initiation and engagement, performance measures that focus on the frequency and timely receipt of services in the early stages of substance use disorders (SUD) treatment, are useful tools for assessing treatment quality differences across racial/ethnic groups. The purpose of this study was to examine whether there are racial/ethnic disparities in these quality indicators and to explore whether predictors of treatment initiation and engagement differ by clients' race/ethnicity. METHODS: This study used administrative data from outpatient treatment facilities licensed by the state of Massachusetts that receive public funding. The sample consisted of 10,666 adult clients (76% White, 13% Latino, 11% Black) who began an outpatient treatment episode in 2006. Client data were linked with facility data from the National Survey on Substance Abuse Treatment Services. Multilevel regressions were used to examine racial/ethnic disparities and to explore whether predictors for initiation and engagement differed by client's race/ethnicity. RESULTS: We did not find evidence of racial/ethnic disparities in treatment initiation or engagement. However, we found that predictors of initiation and engagement differed by client's race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Disparities may be context specific, and thus it is important that they be examined at state or local levels. Our results point to the importance of examining predictors of quality indicators separately by group to better understand and address the needs of diverse client populations.

Management of Newer Antidepressant Medications in U.S. Commercial Health Plans.

BACKGROUND: Private health insurance plays a large role in the U.S. health system, including for many individuals with depression. Private insurers have been actively trying to influence pharmaceutical utilization and costs, particularly for newer and costlier medications. The approaches that insurers use may have important effects on patients' access to antidepressant medications. AIMS OF THE STUDY: To report which approaches (e.g., tiered copayments, prior authorization, and step therapy) commercial health plans are employing to manage newer antidepressant medications, and how the use of these approaches has changed since 2003. METHODS: Data are from a nationally representative survey of commercial health plans in 60 market areas regarding alcohol, drug abuse and mental health services in 2010. Responses were obtained from 389 plans (89% response rate), reporting on 925 insurance products. For each of six branded antidepressant medications, respondents were asked whether the plan covered the medication and if so, on what copayment tier, and whether it was subject to prior authorization or step therapy. Measures of management approach were constructed for each medication and for the group of medications. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to test for association of the management approach with various health plan characteristics. RESULTS: Less than 1% of health plan products excluded any of the six antidepressants studied. Medications were more likely to be subjected to restrictions if they were newer, more expensive or were reformulations. 55% of products used placement on a high cost-sharing tier (3 or 4) as their only form of restriction for newer branded antidepressants. This proportion was lower than in 2003, when 71% of products took this approach. In addition, only 2% of products left all the newer branded medications unrestricted, down from 25% in 2003. Multivariate analysis indicated that preferred provider organizations were more likely than other product types to use tier 3 or 4 placement. DISCUSSION: We find that U.S. health plans are using a variety of strategies to manage cost and utilization of newer branded antidepressant medications. Plans appear to be finding that approaches other than exclusion are adequate to meet their cost-management goals for newer branded antidepressants, although they have increased their use of administrative restrictions since 2003. Limitations include lack of information about how administrative restrictions were applied in practice, information on only six medications, and some potential for endogeneity bias in the regression analyses. CONCLUSION: This study has documented substantial use of various restrictions on access to newer branded antidepressants in U.S. commercial health plans. Most of these medications had generic equivalents that offered at least some substitutability, reducing access concerns. At the same time, it is worth noting that high copayments and administrative requirements can nonetheless be burdensome for some patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: Health plans' pharmacy management approaches may concern policymakers less than in the early 2000s, due to the lesser distinctiveness of today's branded medications. This may change depending on future drug introductions. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Future research should examine the impact of plans' pharmacy management approaches, using patient-level data.

Payment-related barriers to medications for opioid use disorder: A critical review of the literature and real-world application.

BACKGROUND: The national opioid crisis continues to intensify, despite the fact that opioid use disorder (OUD) is treatable and opioid overdose deaths are preventable through first-line treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study identifies and categorizes payment-related barriers that impact MOUD access and retention from both the provider and patient perspectives and provides insight into how these barriers can be addressed. METHODS: We performed a critical review of the literature (peer-reviewed studies and relevant documents from the gray literature) to identify payment-related access and retention barriers to MOUD. We used the results of this review to develop an analytic framework to understand how payment impacts MOUD access and retention for both providers and patients. In addition, we reviewed action plans developed by Massachusetts communities that participated in the Healing Communities Study (HCS) to analyze which payment-related barriers were addressed through the study. RESULTS: We identified 18 payment-related barriers that patients or providers face when initiating or continuing MOUD with either methadone or buprenorphine in Opioid Treatment Programs (OTP) and non-OTP settings. Patient-related barriers mainly relate to health insurance coverage or the design of health plans (e.g., cost sharing, covered benefits) resulting in direct (medical and non-medical) and indirect costs that can affect both access and retention, especially as they relate to services provided in OTPs. Provider-related barriers include low reimbursement and administrative burden and are most likely to impact access to MOUD. Evidence-based strategies to expand MOUD as part of the HCS in Massachusetts targeted about half of the patient and provider payment-related barriers identified. CONCLUSION: Patients and providers face an array of payment-related barriers that impact access to and retention on MOUD, most of which relate to inadequate health insurance coverage, features of health plans, and key federal and state policies. As new regulatory policies are enacted that expand access to MOUD, such as greater flexibility in OTPs and MOUD delivered via telehealth, it will be important to align these delivery changes with payment reform involving payers, providers, and policymakers.

Mobile clinics for opioid use disorders: What they do and how they do it. A qualitative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: People with substance use disorders (SUD) face many barriers to receiving evidence-based treatments including access to and cost of treatment. People who use drugs face stigma that limits access to traditional office-based clinics. With the goal of reducing morbidity and mortality, mobile clinics reduce many of these barriers by providing harm reduction and on-demand low-threshold medical care. METHODS: In 2020 Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) Mobile Addiction Services Program expanded a program called Community Care in Reach building on its success in reducing barriers to care and increasing patient encounters. In the current evaluation we conducted site visits to the four new mobile clinics and conducted one individual semi-structured provider interview at each of the four clinics. In addition, we supported a monthly learning collaborative of staff in four agencies involved with this initiative. The current evaluation used the RE-AIM framework to analyze the implementation of the mobile clinics. RESULTS: Clinicians described many challenges and opportunities. The typical patient is unhoused, having a substance use disorder, and disconnected from traditional pathways to care. Clinicians are able to initiate people on buprenorphine largely due to the trust they establish with patients. Referral networks are facilitated by established community linkages. The philosophy of care is patient-centered. Mobile clinics provide a wide range of healthcare services including harm reduction, although finding a location to park and relations with police can be challenging. The workflow is uneven due to the model that is built on unscheduled visits. CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into how mobile clinics address the gaps in care for persons with OUD and fatal opioid overdoses. Harm reduction services are a critical intervention and financial sustainability of mobile clinics has to be tested.

Drinking patterns of older adults with chronic medical conditions.

BACKGROUND: Understanding alcohol consumption patterns of older adults with chronic illness is important given the aging baby boomer generation, the increase in prevalence of chronic conditions and associated medication use, and the potential consequences of excessive drinking in this population. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of alcohol consumption patterns, including at-risk drinking, in older adults with at least one of seven common chronic conditions. DESIGN/METHODS: This descriptive study used the nationally representative 2005 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey linked with Medicare claims. The sample included community-dwelling, fee-for-service beneficiaries 65 years and older with one or more of seven chronic conditions (Alzheimer's disease and other senile dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, and stroke; n = 7,422). Based on self-reported alcohol consumption, individuals were categorized as nondrinkers, within-guidelines drinkers, or at-risk drinkers (exceeds guidelines). RESULTS: Overall, 30.9 % (CI 28.0-34.1 %) of older adults with at least one of seven chronic conditions reported alcohol consumption in a typical month in the past year, and 6.9 % (CI 6.0-7.8 %) reported at-risk drinking. Older adults with higher chronic disease burdens were less likely to report alcohol consumption and at-risk drinking. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-third of older adults with selected chronic illnesses report drinking alcohol and almost 7 % drink in excess of National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) guidelines. It is important for physicians and patients to discuss alcohol consumption as a component of chronic illness management. In cases of at-risk drinking, providers have an opportunity to provide brief intervention or to offer referrals if needed.

Development of an addiction recovery patient-reported outcome measure: Response to Addiction Recovery (R2AR).

BACKGROUND: Recovery, a primary goal of addiction treatment, goes beyond abstinence. Incorporating broad domains with key elements that vary across individuals, recovery is a difficult concept to measure. Most addiction-related quality measurement has emphasized process measures, which limits evaluation of treatment quality and long-term outcomes, whereas patient-reported outcomes are richer and nuanced. To address these gaps, this study developed and tested a patient-reported outcome measure for addiction recovery, named Response to Addiction Recovery (R2AR). METHODS: A multi-stage mixed methods approach followed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measure development standard. People with lived experience (PWLE) of addiction, treatment providers, and other experts contributed to item distillation and iterative measure refinement. From an item bank of 356 unique items, 57 items were tested via survey and interviews, followed by focus groups and cognitive interviews. RESULTS: Face validity was demonstrated throughout. PWLE rated item importance higher and with greater variance than providers, yet both agreed that "There are more important things to me in my life than using substances" was the most important item. The final R2AR instrument has 19 items across 8 recovery domains, spanning early, active, and long-term recovery phases. Respondents assess agreement for each item as (1) a strength, and (2) importance to ongoing recovery. CONCLUSION: R2AR allows PWLE to define what is important to their recovery. It is designed to support treatment planning as part of clinical workflows and to track recovery progress. Inclusion of PWLE and providers in the development process enhances its face validity. Including PWLE in the development of R2AR and using the tool to guide recovery planning emphasizes the importance of patient-centeredness in designing clinical tools and involving patients in their own care.

The role of health plans in addressing the opioid crisis: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Health plans are key players in substance use treatment in the United States, and the opioid crisis presents new challenges for them. This article is part of the HEALing Communities Study (HCS) funded by NIH, which seeks to facilitate communities' adoption of activities that might reduce overdose deaths, including overdose prevention education and naloxone distribution, medication for opioid use disorder, and safer opioid prescribing. We examine how health plans in one state (Massachusetts) are adapting to encourage and sustain activities that help communities to address opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with managers of behavioral health services at eight health plans in Massachusetts that that have Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial lines of business. Two plans in this sample contract with a specialized behavioral health organization ("carve-out"). The interviewees also completed a survey on policies regarding access to treatment and opioid prescribing. Interviews were recorded and transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. Analysis of the data included intended influence of the policies at three levels: member level (micro), group or community level (meso), and system or institutional level (macro). RESULTS: All health plans developed strategies to increase access to treatment for OUD, primarily through eliminating or decreasing cost-sharing, eliminating pre-authorization for MOUD, and increasing supply of providers. Health plans encourage qualified practitioners to offer MOUD, but most do not provide incentives or training. Identifying high risk populations is a focus of health plans in this sample. Naloxone is a covered benefit in all health plans, although with variation in monthly limits and cost-sharing. Most health plans take measures to influence opioid prescribing. Health plans' activities are predominately aimed at the micro (member) level with little ability to influence at the macro (wider system-level changes). CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into how health plans develop strategies to address the rise in OUD and fatal opioid overdoses, many of which are key in the HCS initiative. How active a role health plans play in addressing the opioid crisis varies, even within the insurance industry in one state (Massachusetts).

Protocol for the implementation of a statewide mobile addiction program.

With overdose deaths increasing, improving access to harm reduction and low barrier substance use disorder treatment is more important than ever. The Community Care in Reach® model uses a mobile unit to bring both harm reduction and clinical care for addiction to people experiencing barriers to office-based care. These mobile units provide many resources and services to people who use drugs, including safer consumption supplies, naloxone, medication for substance use disorder treatment, and a wide range of primary and preventative care. This protocol outlines the evaluation plan for the Community in Care® model in MA, USA. Using the RE-AIM framework, this evaluation will assess how mobile services engage new and underserved communities in addiction services and primary and preventative care.

Customization in prescribing for bipolar disorder.

For many disorders, patient heterogeneity requires physicians to customize their treatment to each patient's needs. We test for the existence of customization in physicians' prescribing for bipolar disorder, using data from a naturalistic clinical effectiveness trial of bipolar disorder treatment (STEP-BD), which did not constrain physician prescribing. Multinomial logit is used to model the physician's choice among five combinations of drug classes. We find that our observed measure of the patient's clinical status played only a limited role in the choice among drug class combinations, even for conditions such as mania that are expected to affect class choice. However, treatment of a patient with given characteristics differed widely depending on which physician was seen. The explanatory power of the model was low. There was variation within each physician's prescribing, but the results do not suggest a high degree of customization in physicians' prescribing, based on our measure of clinical status.

Frequent binge drinking after combat-acquired traumatic brain injury among active duty military personnel with a past year combat deployment.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether combat-acquired traumatic brain injury (TBI) is associated with postdeployment frequent binge drinking among a random sample of active duty military personnel. PARTICIPANTS: Active duty military personnel who returned home within the past year from deployment to a combat theater of operations and completed a survey health assessment (N = 7155). METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study with multivariate analysis of responses to the 2008 Department of Defense Survey of Health Related Behaviors Among Active Duty Military Personnel, an anonymous, random, population-based assessment of the armed forces. MAIN MEASURES: Frequent binge drinking: 5 or more drinks on the same occasion, at least once per week, in the past 30 days. TBI-AC: self-reported altered consciousness only; loss of consciousness (LOC) of less than 1 minute (TBI-LOC <1); and LOC of 1 minute or greater (TBI-LOC 1+) after combat injury event exposure. RESULTS: Of active duty military personnel who had a past year combat deployment, 25.6% were frequent binge drinkers and 13.9% reported experiencing a TBI on the deployment, primarily TBI-AC (7.5%). In regression models adjusting for demographics and positive screen for posttraumatic stress disorder, active duty military personnel with TBI had increased odds of frequent binge drinking compared with those with no injury exposure or without TBI: TBI-AC (adjusted odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.84); TBI-LOC 1+ (adjusted odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-2.79). CONCLUSIONS: Traumatic brain injury was significantly associated with past month frequent binge drinking after controlling for posttraumatic stress disorder, combat exposure, and other covariates.