Utilization of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Among West Virginia Medicaid Enrollees Following Medicaid Coverage of Methadone.

BACKGROUND: West Virginia entered an institution for mental disease Section 1115 waiver with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in 2018, which allowed Medicaid to cover methadone at West Virginia's nine opioid treatment programs (OTPs) for the first time. METHODS: We conducted time trend and geospatial analyses of Medicaid enrollees between 2016 and 2019 to examine medications for opioid use disorder utilization patterns following Medicaid coverage of methadone, focusing on distance to an OTP as a predictor of initiating methadone and conditional on receiving any, longer treatment duration. RESULTS: Following Medicaid coverage of methadone in 2018, patients receiving methadone comprised 9.5% of all Medicaid enrollees with an opioid use disorder (OUD) diagnosis and 10.6% in 2019 (P < 0.01). In 2018, two-thirds of methadone patients either had no prior OUD diagnosis or were not previously enrolled in Medicaid in our observation period. Patients residing within 20 miles of an OTP were more likely to receive methadone (marginal effect [ME]: -0.041, P < 0.001). Similarly, patients residing in metropolitan areas were more likely to receive treatment than those residing in nonmetropolitan areas (ME: -0.019, P < 0.05). Metropolitan patients traveled an average of 15 miles to an OTP; nonmetropolitan patients traveled more than twice as far (P < 0.001). We found no significant association between distance and treatment duration. CONCLUSIONS: West Virginia Medicaid's new methadone coverage was associated with an influx of new enrollees with OUD, many of whom had no previous OUD diagnosis or prior Medicaid enrollment. Methadone patients frequently traveled far distances for treatment, suggesting that the state needs additional OTPs and innovative methadone delivery models to improve availability.

Trends and Disparities in Perinatal Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in Medicaid, 2007-2012.

We described Medicaid-insured women by receipt of perinatal opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment; and trends and disparities in treatment. Using 2007 to 2012 Medicaid Analytic eXtract data from 45 states and D.C., we identified deliveries among women with OUD. Regressions modeled the association between patient characteristics and receipt of any OUD treatment, medication for OUD (MOUD), and counseling alone during the perinatal period. Rates of any OUD treatment and MOUD for women with perinatal OUD increased over the study period, but trends differed by subgroup. Compared with non-Hispanic White women, Black and American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN) women were less likely to receive any OUD treatment, and Black women were less likely to receive MOUD. Over time, the disparity in receipt of MOUD between Black and White women increased. Overall gains in OUD treatment were driven by improvements in perinatal OUD care for White women and obscured disparities for Black and AI/AN women.

Disparities in Perinatal and Emergency Care Receipt Among Women With Perinatal Opioid Use Disorder in Medicaid, 2007 to 2012.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to better understand receipt of perinatal and emergency care among women with perinatal opioid use disorder (OUD) and explore variation by race/ethnicity. METHODS: We used 2007-2012 Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) data from all 50 states and the District of Columbia to examine 6,823,471 deliveries for women 18 to 44 years old. Logistic regressions modeled the association between (1) OUD status and receipt of perinatal and emergency care, and (2) receipt of perinatal and emergency care and race/ethnicity, conditional on OUD diagnosis and controlling for patient and county characteristics. We used robust SEs, clustered at the individual level, and included state and year fixed effects. RESULTS: Women with perinatal OUD were less likely to receive adequate prenatal care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.46) and attend the postpartum visit (aOR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.45-0.47) and more likely to seek emergency care (aOR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.45-1.51) than women without perinatal OUD. Among women with perinatal OUD, Black, Hispanic, and American Indian and Alaskan Native (AI/AN) women were less likely to receive adequate prenatal care (aOR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.64-0.72]; aOR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.80-0.92]; aOR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.64-0.79]) and attend the postpartum visit (aOR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.80-0.91]; aOR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.80-0.93]; aOR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.73-0.94]) relative to non-Hispanic White women. Black and AI/AN women were also more likely to receive emergency care (aOR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.05-1.20]; aOR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.00-1.26]). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that women with perinatal OUD, in particular Black, Hispanic, and AI/AN women, may be missing opportunities for preventive care and comprehensive management of their physical and behavioral health during pregnancy.

Trends in 2-1-1 Calls During Public Health Emergencies, Overall and By Gender: Hurricane Irma and COVID-19 in Broward County, Florida.

Trends in 2-1-1 calls reflect evolving community needs during public health emergencies (PHEs). The study examined how changes in 2-1-1 call volume after 2 PHEs (Hurricane Irma and the coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] pandemic declaration) in Broward County, Florida, varied by PHE type and whether variations differed by gender and over time. Examining 2-1-1 calls during June to December 2016, June to December 2017, and March 2019 to April 2021, this study measured changes in call volume post-PHEs using interrupted time series analysis. Hurricane Irma and the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with increases in call volume (+81 calls/d and +84 calls/d, respectively). Stratified by gender, these PHEs were associated with larger absolute increases for women (+66 and +57 calls/d vs +15 and +27 calls/d for men) but larger percent increases above their baseline for men (+143% and +174% vs +119% and +138% for women). Calls by women remained elevated longer after Hurricane Irma (5 wk vs 1 wk), but the opposite pattern was observed after the pandemic declaration (8 vs 21 wk). PHEs reduce gender differences in help-seeking around health-related social needs. Findings demonstrate the utility of 2-1-1 call data for monitoring and responding to evolving community needs in the PHE context.

Changes in Poison Center Calls for Intentional Exposure During Public Health Emergencies: COVID-19 and Winter Storm Uri in Dallas County, Texas.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to: (1) explore changes in the volume of calls to poison control centers (PCs) for intentional exposures (IEs) in Dallas County, Texas, overall and by gender and age, and (2) examine the association between 2 different public health emergencies (PHEs) and changes in IE call volume. METHODS: PCs categorize calls they receive by intentionality of the exposure, based on information from the caller. We analyzed data on PC calls categorized as intentional in Dallas County, Texas, from March 2019 - April 2021. This period includes the COVID-19 pandemic declaration (March 2020), a surge in COVID-19 cases (July 2020), and Winter Storm Uri (February 2021). Changes in IE call volume (overall and by age and gender), were explored, and interrupted time series analysis was used to examine call volume changes after PHE onset. RESULTS: The summer surge in COVID-19 cases was associated with 1.9 additional IE calls/day (95% CI 0.7 to 3.1), in the context of a baseline unadjusted mean of 6.2 calls per day (unadjusted) before November 3, 2020. Neither the pandemic declaration nor Winter Storm Uri was significantly associated with changes in call volume. Women, on average, made 1.2 more calls per day compared to men during the study period. IE calls for youth increased after the pandemic declaration, closing the longstanding gap between adults and youth by early 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in IE call volume in Dallas County varied by gender and age. Calls increased during the local COVID-19 surge. Population-level behavioral health may be associated with local crisis severity.

Buprenorphine Treatment Episodes During the First Year of COVID: a Retrospective Examination of Treatment Initiation and Retention.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID pandemic, overall buprenorphine treatment appeared to remain relatively stable, despite some studies suggesting a decrease in patients starting buprenorphine. There is a paucity of empirical information regarding patterns of buprenorphine treatment during the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the patterns of buprenorphine episodes during the pandemic and how those patterns compared to pre-pandemic patterns. DESIGN: Pharmacy claims representing approximately 92% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions indicated for treatment of opioid use disorder. MAIN MEASURES: The number of active, starting, and ending buprenorphine treatment episodes March 13 to December 1, 2020, and the expected number of such episodes in 2020 based on the growth in treatment episodes from March 13 to December 1, 2019. KEY RESULTS: The observed number of active buprenorphine episodes in December 2020 was comparable to the expected number, but new treatment episodes starting between March 13 and December 1, 2020, were 17.2% fewer than expected based on the 2019 experience. Similarly, the number of episodes that ended between March 13 and December 1, 2020, was 16.0% fewer than expected. Decreases from expected episode starts and ends occurred throughout the period but were greatest in the 2 months after the declaration of the public health emergency. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Beneath the apparent stability of buprenorphine patient numbers during the pandemic, the flow of individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment changed substantially. Our findings shed light on how policy changes meant to support buprenorphine prescribing influenced prescribing dynamics during that period, suggesting that while policy efforts may have been successful in maintaining existing patients in treatment, that success did not extend to individuals not yet in treatment.

Buprenorphine treatment episode duration, dosage, and concurrent prescribing of benzodiazepines and opioid analgesics: The effects of Medicaid prior authorization policies.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is an effective medication for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD), but the association between prior authorization policies and quality of care for individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment is not well-understood. METHODS: Using 2006-2013 Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) data from 34 states and the District of Columbia, we identified 294,031 episodes of buprenorphine treatment for OUD among individuals aged 14-64 years. We estimated generalized difference-in-differences models to examine the association between buprenorphine prior authorization policies and changes in buprenorphine treatment quality along four dimensions: (1) duration of at least 180 days, (2) dosage of at least 8 milligrams, and concurrent prescribing of (3) opioid analgesics and (4) benzodiazepines. RESULTS: Buprenorphine prior authorization policies were associated with an 11-percentage point reduction (p < 0.01) in the likelihood of episodes with a duration of at least 180 days in the first four years after policy implementation. The policy was not associated with changes in effective dosage or concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics or benzodiazepines. CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine prior authorization policies were associated with a sizeable and significant reduction in episodes of at least 180 days duration, underscoring the importance of identifying and removing barriers to effective and appropriate OUD care.

Differences in buprenorphine treatment quality across physician provider specialties.

BACKGROUND: The number and types of clinicians prescribing buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased over the past two decades, but there is little information on how potential indicators of quality of care to patients receiving buprenorphine vary by provider specialty. METHODS: We used the Medicaid Analytic eXtract from 2009 to 2014 to identify buprenorphine treatment episodes. We assigned physician specialties to episodes based on whether an episode had at least one outpatient claim linked to specialists in addiction, behavioral health, opioid treatment program (OTP), pain, or primary care provider (PCP). We then used logistic regressions to estimate the association of linked physician specialty and achievement of the following process of care measures: at least 180-day duration, no co-occurring opioid analgesics, no co-occurring benzodiazepines, infectious disease screening, liver function test, drug and toxicology screenings, evaluation and management visits, and counseling. RESULTS: Episodes linked to PCPs had significantly lower odds of achieving 180-day duration, an absence of opioid analgesics, an absence of benzodiazepines, drug and toxicology screenings, and counseling compared to addiction, behavioral health, and/or OTPs. Episodes linked to PCPs had significantly higher odds of undergoing infectious disease screenings, liver function tests, and evaluation and management visits compared to all specialty categories. CONCLUSIONS: Episodes were more likely to achieve process of care measures related to the specialties of their physicians, but no specialty consistently demonstrated better performance compared to PCPs. Our findings highlight the need for models that can better integrate physical and behavioral health services for OUD treatment.

Sociodemographic differences in quality of treatment to Medicaid enrollees receiving buprenorphine.

Background: Buprenorphine is a key medication to treat opioid use disorder, but little is known about how treatment quality varies across sociodemographic groups. Objective: We examined measures of treatment quality and explored variation by sociodemographic factors. Methods: We used Medicaid MAX data from 50 states from 2006 to 2014 to identify buprenorphine treatment episodes (N = 317,494). We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the quality of buprenorphine treatment along four dimensions: (1) sufficient duration, (2) effective dosage, and concurrent prescribing of (3) opioid analgesics and (4) benzodiazepines. We explored how quality varied by race/ethnicity, age, sex, and urbanicity. Results: In adjusted models, compared to non-Hispanic White individuals, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic individuals had lower odds of receiving effective dosage (aORs = 0.79 and 0.89, respectively) and sufficient duration (aORs = 0.64 and 0.71, respectively), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aORs = 0.86 and 0.85, respectively) and benzodiazepines (aORs = 0.51 and 0.59, respectively). Older individuals had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs from 1.21-1.33), but also had higher odds of concurrent opioid analgesics prescribing (aORs from 1.29-1.56) and benzodiazepines (aORs from 1.44-1.99). Females had higher odds of sufficient duration (aOR = 1.12), but lower odds of effective dosage (aOR = 0.77) and higher odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aOR = 1.25) and benzodiazepines (aOR = 1.16). Compared to individuals living in metropolitan areas, individuals living in non-metropolitan areas had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs = 1.11 and 1.24) and effective dosage (aORs = 1.06 and 1.33), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing (aORs from 0.81-0.98). Conclusions: Black and Hispanic individuals were less likely to receive effective buprenorphine dosage and sufficient duration. Quality results were mixed for older and female individuals; although these individuals were more likely to receive treatment of sufficient duration, they were also more likely to be concurrently prescribed potentially contraindicated medications, and females were less likely to receive effective dosage. Findings raise concerns about adequacy of care for minority and other at-risk populations.

A bridge too far? Distance to waivered physicians and utilization of buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder in West Virginia Medicaid.

Background: Travel distance to medication treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is a challenge for many patients, but little is known about how distance is associated with medication treatment utilization. This study examines the association between distance to the nearest physician waivered to prescribe buprenorphine and patient-level buprenorphine treatment among West Virginia Medicaid expansion enrollees with diagnosed OUD. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional spatial analysis with 2016 Medicaid claims data, separately examining individuals living in metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. We calculated the driving distance from the centroid of patients' residential ZIP codes to the street address of the nearest waivered physician derived from the 2015 Drug Enforcement Administration listing. Regression models examined the association between distance and initiation and duration of buprenorphine (among those initiating). Results: We focused on 8,008 individuals with OUD in 2016. The nearest waivered prescriber in metropolitan areas was an average of 7.13 miles away from patients' residential ZIP codes and 14.54 miles in non-metropolitan areas. The providers they actually visited were a mean of 33.63 miles away in metro areas and 46.36 in non-metropolitan areas. In multivariable analyses, compared to those living <10 miles from a waivered physician, living >20 miles from a waivered physician was associated with -32.13 fewer days of treatment (95% CI: -57.86, -6.40) in metro areas and -16.70 fewer days in non-metro areas (95% CI: -32.32, -1.08). Conclusions: Longer travel distance to buprenorphine treatment is associated with a shorter duration of care that is likely to be clinically meaningful.