Mobile treatment for opioid use disorder: Implementation of community-based, same-day medication access interventions.

BACKGROUND: Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) are lifesaving, but <20 % of individuals in the US who could benefit receive them. As part of the NIH-supported HEALing Communities Study (HCS), coalitions in several communities in Massachusetts and Ohio implemented mobile MOUD programs to overcome barriers to MOUD receipt. We defined mobile MOUD programs as units that provide same-day access to MOUD at remote sites. We aimed to (1) document the design and organizational structure of mobile programs providing same-day or next-day MOUD, and (2) explore the barriers and facilitators to implementation as well as the successes and challenges of ongoing operation. METHODS: Program staff from five programs in two states (n = 11) participated in semi-structured interviews. Two authors conducted thematic analysis of the transcripts based on the domains of the social-ecological model and the semi-structured interview guide. RESULTS: Mobile MOUD units sought to improve immediate access to MOUD ("Our answer is pretty much always, 'Yes, we'll get you started right here, right now,'"), advance equity ("making sure that we have staff who speak other languages, who are on the unit and have some resources that are in different languages,"), and decrease opioid overdose deaths. Salient program characteristics included diverse staff, including staff with lived experience of substance use ("She just had that personal knowledge of where we should be going"). Mobile units offered harm reduction services, broad medical services (in particular, wound care), and connection to transportation programs and incorporated consistency in service provision and telemedicine access. Implementation facilitators included trusting relationships with partner organizations (particularly pharmacies and correctional facilities), nuanced understanding of local politics, advertising, protocol flexibility, and on-unit prescriber hours. Barriers included unclear licensing requirements, staffing shortages and competing priorities for staff, funding challenges due to inconsistency in grant funding and low reimbursement ("It's not really possible that billing in and of itself is going to be able to sustain it"), and community stigma toward addiction services generally. CONCLUSIONS: Despite organizational, community, and policy barriers, participants described mobile MOUD units as an innovative way to expand access to life-saving medications, promote equity in MOUD treatment, and overcome stigma.

Community advisory board members' perspectives on their contributions to a large multistate cluster RCT: a mixed methods study.

Background: Community advisory boards (CABs) are an established approach to ensuring research reflects community priorities. This paper examines two CABs that are part of the HEALing Communities Study which aims to reduce overdose mortality. This analysis aimed to understand CAB members' expectations, experiences, and perspectives on CAB structure, communication, facilitation, and effectiveness during the first year of an almost fully remote CAB implementation. Current literature exploring these perspectives is limited. Methods: We collected qualitative and survey data simultaneously from members (n = 53) of two sites' CABs in the first 9 months of CAB development. The survey assessed trust, communication, and relations; we also conducted 32 semi-structured interviews. We analyzed the survey results descriptively. The qualitative data were analyzed using a deductive codebook based on the RE-AIM PRISM framework. Themes were drawn from the combined qualitative data and triangulated with survey results to further enrich the findings. Results: CAB members expressed strong commitment to overall study goals and valued the representation of occupational sectors. The qualitative data described a dissonance between CAB members' commitment to the mission and unmet expectations for influencing the study within an advisory role. Survey results indicated lower satisfaction with the research teams' ability to create a mutually beneficial process, clear communication, and sharing of power. Conclusion: Building a CAB on a remote platform, within a study utilizing a community engagement strategy, still presents challenges to fully realizing the potential of a CAB. These findings can inform more effective operationalizing of community-engaged research through enhanced CAB engagement.

A Qualitative Study of Health Equity's Role in Community Coalition Development.

Opioid overdose deaths are dramatically increasing in the United States and disproportionately affecting minority communities, with the increasing presence of fentanyl exacerbating this crisis. Developing community coalitions is a long-standing strategy used to address public health issues. However, there is a limited understanding of how coalitions operate amid a serious public health crisis. To address this gap, we leveraged data from the HEALing Communities Study (HCS)-a multisite implementation study aiming to reduce opioid overdose deaths in 67 communities. Researchers analyzed transcripts of 321 qualitative interviews conducted with members of 56 coalitions in the four states participating in the HCS. There were no a priori interests in themes, and emergent themes were identified through inductive thematic analysis and then mapped to the constructs of the Community Coalition Action Theory (CCAT). Themes emerged related to coalition development and highlighted the role of health equity in the inner workings of coalitions addressing the opioid epidemic. Coalition members reported seeing the lack of racial and ethnic diversity within their coalitions as a barrier to their work. However, when coalitions focused on health equity, they noted that their effectiveness and ability to tailor their initiatives to their communities' needs were strengthened. Based on our findings, we suggest two additions to enhance the CCAT: (a) incorporating health equity as an overarching construct that affects all stages of development, and (b) ensuring that data about individuals served are included within the pooled resource construct to enable monitoring of health equity.

Clinician's experiences with involuntary commitment for substance use disorder: A qualitative study of moral distress.

BACKGROUND: Petitions for involuntary commitment of people living with a substance use disorder (SUD) have almost doubled since 2011 in Massachusetts through the policy Section 35. However, the efficacy of this controversial policy remains unclear, and clinicians differ on whether it ought to be used. This study examines how clinicians decide whether to use Section 35 and their experiences of moral distress, the negative feeling that occurs when a clinician is required to pursue a treatment option against their moral judgement due to institutional constraints, associated with its use. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews with clinicians in Massachusetts were conducted between December 2019 and February 2020 and continued until thematic saturation. Thematic and narrative analysis was conducted with recorded and transcribed interviews. RESULTS: Among 21 clinicians, most (77%) experienced some or high moral distress when utilizing Section 35 for involuntary commitment, with clinicians working in emergency departments experiencing less distress than those working in SUD clinics. Clinicians with low moral distress referenced successful patient anecdotes and held an abstinence-based view of SUD, while clinicians with high moral distress were concerned by systemic treatment failures and understood SUD through a nuanced and harm reduction-oriented view. Clinicians across professional settings were concerned by the involvement of law enforcement and criminal justice settings in the Section 35 process. Clinicians employed a variety of strategies to cope with moral distress, including team-based decision-making and viewing the petition as a last resort. Barriers to utilizing Section 35 included restrictive court hours and lack of post-section aftercare services. CONCLUSION: Widespread distress associated with use of involuntary commitment and inconsistent approaches to its use highlight the need for better care coordination and guidance on best practices for utilization of this policy.

Community coalition and key stakeholder perceptions of the community opioid epidemic before an intensive community-level intervention.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdoses are a major public health emergency in the United States. Despite effective treatments that can save lives, access to and utilization of such treatments are limited. Community context plays an important role in addressing treatment barriers and increasing access. The HEALing Communities Study (HCS) is a multisite community-level cluster-randomized trial that will study implementation and outcomes of a community coalition-based intervention (Communities that HEAL [CTH]) that implements evidence-based practices (EBPs) to reduce opioid overdose deaths in four states. To examine contextual factors critical to understanding implementation, we assessed the perspectives of community members about their communities, current substance use-related services, and other important issues that could impact intervention implementation. METHODS: Researchers conducted 382 semi-structured qualitative interviews in the HCS communities. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed; researchers subsequently analyzed data using directed content analysis based on the constructs of the RE-AIM/PRISM implementation science framework to identify key themes within the external community context. RESULTS: Despite the diversity in states and communities, four similar themes related to the external community context emerged across communities: These themes included the importance of understanding: 1) community risk perceptions, 2) levels of stigma, 3) the health services environment and the availability of substance use services, and 4) funding for substance use services. CONCLUSION: Understanding and addressing the external community context in which the CTH intervention and EBPs are implemented are crucial for successful health services-related and community engaged interventions. While implementing EBPs is a challenging undertaking, doing so will help us to understand if and how a community-based intervention can successfully reduce opioid overdose deaths and influence both community beliefs and the community treatment landscape.