Association Between Increased Dispensing of Opioid Agonist Therapy Take-Home Doses and Opioid Overdose and Treatment Interruption and Discontinuation.

Importance: During the COVID-19 pandemic, modified guidance for opioid agonist therapy (OAT) allowed prescribers to increase the number of take-home doses to promote treatment retention. Whether this was associated with an increased risk of overdose is unclear. Objective: To evaluate whether increased take-home doses of OAT early in the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with treatment retention and opioid-related harm. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective propensity-weighted cohort study of 21 297 people actively receiving OAT on March 21, 2020, in Ontario, Canada. Changes in OAT take-home dose frequency were assessed between March 22, 2020, and April 21, 2020, and individuals were observed for up to 180 days to assess outcomes (last date of follow-up, October 18, 2020). Exposures: Exposure was defined as extended take-home doses in the first month of the pandemic within each of 4 cohorts based on OAT type and baseline take-home dose frequency (daily dispensed methadone, 5-6 take-home doses of methadone, daily dispensed buprenorphine/naloxone, and 5-6 take-home doses of buprenorphine/naloxone). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were opioid overdose, interruption in OAT, and OAT discontinuation. Results: Among 16 862 methadone and 4435 buprenorphine/naloxone recipients, the median age ranged between 38 and 42 years, and 29.1% to 38.2% were women. Among individuals receiving daily dispensed methadone (n = 5852), initiation of take-home doses was significantly associated with lower risks of opioid overdose (6.9% vs 9.5%/person-year; weighted hazard ratio [HR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56-0.96]), treatment discontinuation (51.0% vs 63.6%/person-year; weighted HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.72-0.90]), and treatment interruption (19.0% vs 23.9%/person-year; weighted HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.95]) compared with no change in take-home doses. Among individuals receiving daily dispensed buprenorphine/naloxone (n = 662), there was no significant difference in any outcomes between exposure groups. Among individuals receiving weekly dispensed OAT (n = 11 010 for methadone; n = 3773 for buprenorphine/naloxone), extended take-home methadone doses were significantly associated with lower risks of OAT discontinuation (14.1% vs 19.6%/person-year; weighted HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.62-0.84]) and interruption in therapy (5.1% vs 7.4%/person-year; weighted HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.53-0.90]), and extended take-home doses of buprenorphine/naloxone were significantly associated with lower risk of interruption in therapy (9.5% vs 12.9%/person-year; weighted HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56-0.99]) compared with no change in take-home doses. Other primary outcomes were not significantly different between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In Ontario, Canada, during the COVID-19 pandemic, dispensing of increased take-home doses of opioid agonist therapy was significantly associated with lower rates of treatment interruption and discontinuation among some subsets of patients receiving opioid agonist therapy, and there were no statistically significant increases in opioid-related overdoses over 6 months of follow-up. These findings may be susceptible to residual confounding and should be interpreted cautiously.

Individual and Health Policy Factors Associated With Positive Heroin and Opioid Treatment Response: United States, 2018.

Objectives. To identify client- and state-level factors associated with positive treatment response among heroin and opioid treatment episodes in the United States. Methods. We used national data from 46 states using the Treatment Episode Dataset‒Discharges (2018) to identify heroin and opioid treatment episodes (n = 162 846). We defined positive treatment response as a decrease in use between admission and discharge. We used multivariable regression, stratified by race/ethnicity, to identify demographic, pain-related, and state-level factors associated with positive treatment response. Results. Lower community distress was the strongest predictor of better treatment outcomes across all racial/ethnic groups, particularly among White and American Indian/Alaska Native episodes. A primary opioid of heroin was associated with worse outcomes among White and Hispanic episodes. Legislation limiting opioid dispensing was associated with better outcomes among Hispanic episodes. Buprenorphine availability was strongly associated with better outcomes among Black episodes. Conclusions. State-level variables, particularly community distress, had greater associations with positive treatment outcomes than client-level variables. Public Health Implications. Changes in state-level policies and increased resources directed toward areas of high community distress have the potential to improve opioid use disorder treatment and reduce racial/ethnic disparities in treatment outcomes. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S1):S66-S76. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306503).

Availability of Medications for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder Among Pregnant and Postpartum Individuals in US Jails.

Importance: Thousands of pregnant people with opioid use disorder (OUD) enter US jails annually, yet their access to medications for OUD (MOUD) that meet the standard of care (methadone and/or buprenorphine) is unknown. Objective: To assess the availability of MOUD for the treatment of pregnant individuals with OUD in US jails. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, electronic and paper surveys were sent to all 2885 identifiable US jails verified in the National Jails Compendium between August 19 and November 7, 2019. Respondents were medical and custody leaders within the jails. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the availability of MOUD (methadone and/or buprenorphine) for the treatment of pregnant people with OUD in US jails. Availability of MOUD was assessed based on (1) continuation of MOUD for pregnant incarcerated individuals (if the individual was receiving MOUD before incarceration), with or without initiation of MOUD; (2) both initiation and continuation of MOUD for pregnant individuals; (3) only continuation of MOUD for pregnant individuals; and (4) management of opioid withdrawal for pregnant individuals. Secondary outcomes included MOUD availability during the postpartum period and logistical factors associated with the provision of MOUD. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to assess factors associated with MOUD availability during pregnancy. Results: Among 2885 total surveys sent, 1139 (39.5%) were returned; of those, 836 surveys (73.4%; 29.0% of all surveys sent) could be analyzed, with similar proportions from metropolitan (399 jails [47.7%]) and rural (381 jails [45.6%]) settings. Overall, 504 jails (60.3%) reported that MOUD was available for medication continuation, with or without medication initiation, during pregnancy. Of those, 267 jails (53.0%; 31.9% of surveys included in the analysis) both initiated and continued MOUD, and 237 jails (47.0%; 28.3% of surveys included in the analysis) only continued MOUD; 190 of 577 jails (32.9%; 22.7% of surveys included in the analysis) reported opioid withdrawal as the only management for pregnant people with OUD. Among the 504 medication-providing jails, only 120 (23.8%) continued to provide MOUD during the postpartum period. Methadone was more commonly available at jails that only continued MOUD (84 of 123 jails [68.3%]), whereas buprenorphine was more commonly available at jails that both initiated and continued MOUD (73 of 119 jails [61.3%]). In an adjusted model, jails with higher odds of MOUD availability were located in the Northeast (odds ratio [OR], 10.72; 95% CI, 2.43-47.36) or metropolitan areas (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.31-2.83), had private health care contracts (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.03-2.14) and a higher number of women (≥70) reported in the female census (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.02-2.80), and provided pregnancy testing within 2 weeks of arrival at the jail (OR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.69-4.17). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, a substantial proportion of US jails did not provide access to MOUD to pregnant people with OUD. Although most jails reported continuing to provide MOUD to individuals who were receiving medication before incarceration, few jails initiated MOUD, and most medication-providing jails discontinued MOUD during the postpartum period. These results suggest that many pregnant and postpartum people with OUD in US jails do not receive medication that is the standard of care and are required to endure opioid withdrawal, signaling an opportunity for intervention to improve care for pregnant people who are incarcerated.

Accessibility to Medication for Opioid Use Disorder After Interventions to Improve Prescribing Among Nonaddiction Clinics in the US Veterans Health Care System.

Importance: With increasing rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths in the US, increased access to medications for OUD (MOUD) is paramount. Rigorous effectiveness evaluations of large-scale implementation initiatives using quasi-experimental designs are needed to inform expansion efforts. Objective: To evaluate a US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initiative to increase MOUD use in nonaddiction clinics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement initiative used interrupted time series design to compare trends in MOUD receipt. Primary care, pain, and mental health clinics in the VA health care system (n = 35) located at 18 intervention facilities and nonintervention comparison clinics (n = 35) were matched on preimplementation MOUD prescribing trends, clinic size, and facility complexity. The cohort of patients with OUD who received care in intervention or comparison clinics in the year after September 1, 2018, were evaluated. The preimplementation period extended from September 1, 2017, through August 31, 2018, and the postimplementation period from September 1, 2018, through August 31, 2019. Exposures: The multifaceted implementation intervention included education, external facilitation, and quarterly reports. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the proportion of patients receiving MOUD and the number of patients per clinician prescribing MOUD. Segmented logistic regression evaluated monthly proportions of MOUD receipt 1 year before and after initiative launch, adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. Poisson regression models examined yearly changes in clinician prescribing over the same time frame. Results: Overall, 7488 patients were seen in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.3 [14.2] years; 6858 [91.6%] male; 1476 [19.7%] Black, 417 [5.6%] Hispanic; 5162 [68.9%] White; 239 [3.2%] other race [including American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and multiple races]; and 194 [2.6%] unknown) and 7558 in comparison clinics (mean [SD] age, 53.4 [14.0] years; 6943 [91.9%] male; 1463 [19.4%] Black; 405 [5.4%] Hispanic; 5196 [68.9%] White; 244 [3.2%] other race; 250 [3.3%] unknown). During the preimplementation year, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD in intervention clinics increased monthly by 5.0% (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07). Accounting for this preimplementation trend, the proportion of patients receiving MOUD increased monthly by an additional 2.3% (AOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04) during the implementation year. Comparison clinics increased by 2.6% monthly before implementation (AOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04), with no changes detected after implementation. Although preimplementation-year trends in monthly MOUD receipt were similar in intervention and comparison clinics, greater increases were seen in intervention clinics after implementation (AOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08). Patients treated with MOUD per clinician in intervention clinics saw greater increases from before to after implementation compared with comparison clinics (incidence rate ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.28-1.77). Conclusions and Relevance: A multifaceted implementation initiative in nonaddiction clinics was associated with increased MOUD prescribing. Findings suggest that engagement of clinicians in general clinical settings may increase MOUD access.

Improving methadone access for rural communities in the USA: lessons learned from COVID-19 adaptations and international models of care.

CONTEXT: The COVID-19 pandemic led to several changes to methadone treatment protocols at federal opioid treatment programs in the USA. ISSUE: Protocol changes were designed to reduce transmission of COVID-19 while allowing for continuity of care, but those changes also demonstrated that many policies surrounding opioid use disorder care in the USA cause unnecessary burdens to patients. In this commentary, we describe how current policies create and maintain fatal barriers to methadone treatment for people in rural communities who have opioid use disorder, and highlight how COVID-19 adaptations and more flexible methadone models in other countries can better allow for effective and accessible care. Reasons and ways to address these issues to create lasting solutions for rural communities are discussed. LESSONS LEARNED: We focus on three lessons: (1) methadone dispensing and take-home schedules during COVID-19, (2) telehealth services during COVID-19, and (3) international models in use prior to COVID-19. We then outline recommendations for each lesson to improve access to methadone treatment long term for rural communities in the USA. There is an urgent need to implement recommendations that maintain flexible approaches and address methadone treatment barriers in the rural USA. To achieve lasting health policy change and combat stigma about addiction and methadone treatment, there is a need for advocacy efforts that give voice to rural residents impacted by inequitable access to methadone treatment and rural-tailored educational initiatives that promote the evidence base for methadone. We hope opioid treatment program directors, regulatory authorities, and health policymakers consider our recommendations.

Real-world use and clinical outcomes after 24 weeks of treatment with a prescription digital therapeutic for opioid use disorder.

PURPOSE: To evaluate real-world prescription digital therapeutic (PDT) use and associated clinical outcomes among patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A real-world observational evaluation of patients who filled either a 12- or 24-week (refill) prescription for the reSET-O® PDT. The PDT content consists of 67 interactive lessons unlocked in sequence during use as well as the chance to earn rewards for progress and/or negative urine screens. Engagement/retention data (ongoing engagement in weeks 9-12, or 21-24) were collected via the PDT and analyzed with descriptive statistics. Substance use was evaluated as a composite of patient self-reports and urine drug screens (UDS). Missing UDS data were assumed to be positive. A regression analyses of hospital encounters for 12- vs. 24-week prescriptions controlling for covariates was conducted. RESULTS: In a cohort of 3,817 individuals with OUD who completed a 12-week PDT prescription, a cohort of 643 was prescribed a second 12-week 'refill' prescription, for a total treatment time of 24 weeks. Mean age of the 24-week cohort was 39 years, 56.7% female. At 24 weeks of total treatment: abstinence in the last 4 weeks of treatment was 86% in an analysis in which patients with no data are assumed to be positive for illicit opioids. Over 91% of patients were retained in treatment. An analysis of matched insurance claims showed that those treated for 24 weeks had a 27% decrease in unique hospital encounters compared to those who got the first 12-week prescription only. CONCLUSIONS: These data present real-world evidence that a second prescription (24 weeks) of a PDT for OUD is associated with improved outcomes, high levels of retention, and fewer hospital encounters compared to a single prescription for a PDT.PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYPrescription digital therapeutics (PDTs) are software-based treatments that are FDA-authorized to improve clinical outcomes for serious diseases and conditions. The reSET-O PDT consists of 67 interactive lessons unlocked in sequence during use as well as the chance to earn rewards for progress and/or negative urine screens. Multiple studies show that a single 12-week PDT prescription for opioid use disorder (OUD) helps patients engage in treatment, reduces substance use, and helps patients remain in treatment, but to date there has been no evaluation of how patients who receive a 'refill' second prescription engage with the therapeutic and whether the positive effects on substance use and retention are durable across a second 12 weeks (total of 24 weeks) of treatment.This real-world analysis evaluated 643 patients from 12 U.S. states who were prescribed a second PDT prescription. 93% of this cohort completed 8 or more core lesson modules in the second prescription period, 85% completed at least half of core modules, and 64% completed all 32 core modules. Patients used the PDT outside of clinic hours about 40% of the time. 94.4% of patients had 80% or greater negative reports of opioid use across the second 12 weeks of treatment. A 27% decrease in unique hospital encounters was observed in patients who completed a second prescription vs. patients who completed only one prescription.These data show that a second prescription of a PDT for OUD is associated with postive patient outcomes. Patients showed durable and high levels of engagement with the PDT, reduced substance use, and improved treatment retention through 24 weeks of treatment.

A comparison of methods for measuring spatial access to health care.

OBJECTIVE: To compare measures of spatial access to care commonly used by policy makers and researchers with the more comprehensive enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method. STUDY SETTING: Fourteen southwestern Pennsylvania counties. STUDY DESIGN: We estimated spatial access to buprenorphine-waivered prescribers using three commonly used measures-Euclidean travel distance to the closest prescriber, travel time to the closest provider, and provider-to-population ratios-and the E2SFCA. Unlike other measures, the E2SFCA captures provider capacity, potential patient volume, and travel time to prescribers. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We measured provider capacity as the number of buprenorphine prescribers listed at a given address in the Drug Enforcement Agency's 2020 Controlled Substances Act Registrants Database, and we measured potential patient volume as the number of nonelderly adults in a given census tract as reported by the 2018 American Community Survey. We estimated travel times between potential patients and prescribers with Bing Maps and Mapbox application programming interfaces. We then calculated each spatial access measure using the R programming language. We used each measure of spatial access to identify census tracts in the lowest quintile of spatial access to prescribers. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The Euclidean distance, travel time, and provider-to-population ratio measures identified 48.3%, 47.2%, and 69.9% of the census tracts that the E2SFCA measure identified as being in the lowest quintile of spatial access to care, meaning that these measures misclassify 30%-52% of study area census tracts as having sufficient spatial access to buprenorphine prescribers. CONCLUSIONS: Measures of spatial access commonly used by policy makers do not sufficiently accurately identify geographic areas with relatively low access to prescribers of buprenorphine. Using the E2SFCA in addition to the commonly used measures would allow policy makers to precisely target interventions to increase spatial access to opioid use disorder treatment and other types of health care services.

Real-world changes in US health system hospital-based services following treatment with a prescription digital therapeutic for opioid use disorder.

Outcomes associated with buprenorphine therapy for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) are suboptimal. reSET-O is an FDA-authorized prescription digital therapeutic (PDT) delivering neurobehavioral therapy via mobile devices to patients with OUD treated with buprenorphine. This analysis evaluated the net impact of reSET-O on medical costs among actively-engaged reSET-O patients using real-world observations. This real-world retrospective analysis of health care claims between October 2018 and October 2019 evaluated health care resource utilization up to 6 months before and 6 months after the initiation of a reSET-O prescription after accounting for the subset of patients not continuing on therapy after week 1 (non-engaged patients). Repeated-measures negative binomial models compared incidences of hospital-based encounters/procedures adjusted for days in each period as well as associated costs. The number needed to treat (NNT) to avoid an inpatient visit was calculated. Of the 351 patients who were prescribed reSET-O, 321 met the criteria of active engagement. Treatment with reSET-O was associated with a substantial reduction in medical costs of -$765,450 (-$2,385/patient, $235/patient greater than a previous analysis in which non-engaged patients were included) in the 6-month period after initiation. The gross reSET-O prescription cost of $584,415 ($1,665/patient) was substantially offset by $49,950 ($142.31/patient) in refunds to payers. The medical cost reduction in engaged patients offset the cost of the therapeutic resulting in an overall cost reduction of -$230,985 in this cohort (net savings of -$720 per patient). The number needed to treat to avoid an inpatient visit was 4.8. Engagement and continued treatment with reSET-O in patients with OUD treated with buprenorphine is associated with substantial real-world reductions in medical costs in the 6-month period following the initiation of the reSET-O prescription.

Medication Treatment of Active Opioid Use Disorder in Veterans With Cirrhosis.

INTRODUCTION: Although opioid use disorder (OUD) is common in patients with cirrhosis, it is unclear how medication treatment for OUD (MOUD) is used in this population. We aimed to assess the factors associated with MOUD and mortality in a cohort of Veterans with cirrhosis and OUD. METHODS: Within the Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse, we developed a cohort of Veterans with cirrhosis and active OUD, using 2 outpatient or 1 inpatient International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision codes from 2011 to 2015 to define each condition. We assessed MOUD initiation with methadone or buprenorphine over the 180 days following the first OUD International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision code in the study period. We fit multivariable regression models to assess the association of sociodemographic and clinical factors with receiving MOUD and the associations between MOUD and subsequent clinical outcomes, including new hepatic decompensation and mortality. RESULTS: Among 5,600 Veterans meeting criteria for active OUD and cirrhosis, 722 (13%) were prescribed MOUD over 180 days of follow-up. In multivariable modeling, MOUD was significantly, positively associated with age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] per year: 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01-1.07), hepatitis C virus (AOR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.37-3.35), and other substance use disorders (AOR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.05-2.04) negatively associated with alcohol use disorder (AOR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.52-0.95), opioid prescription (AOR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.38-0.70), and schizophrenia (AOR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.37-0.95). MOUD was not significantly associated with mortality (adjusted hazards ratio = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.95-1.52) or new hepatic decompensation (OR = 0.57, CI = 0.30-1.09). DISCUSSION: Few Veterans with active OUD and cirrhosis received MOUD, and those with alcohol use disorder, schizophrenia, and previous prescriptions for opioids were least likely to receive these effective therapies.

Is telemedicine the answer to rural expansion of medication treatment for opioid use disorder? Early experiences in the feasibility study phase of a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network Trial.

Telemedicine (TM) enabled by digital health technologies to provide medical services has been considered a key solution to increasing health care access in rural communities. With the immediate need for remote care due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many health care systems have rapidly incorporated digital technologies to support the delivery of remote care options, including medication treatment for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). In responding to the opioid crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, public health officials and scientific communities strongly support and advocate for greater use of TM-based medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) to improve access to care and have suggested that broad use of TM during the pandemic should be sustained. Nevertheless, research on the implementation and effectiveness of TM-based MOUD has been limited. To address this knowledge gap, the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) funded (via the NIH HEAL Initiative) a study on Rural Expansion of Medication Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder (Rural MOUD; CTN-0102) to investigate the implementation and effectiveness of adding TM-based MOUD to rural primary care for expanding access to MOUD. In preparation for this large-scale, randomized controlled trial incorporating TM in rural primary care, a feasibility study is being conducted to develop and pilot test implementation procedures. In this commentary, we share some of our experiences, which include several challenges, during the initial two-month period of the feasibility study phase. While these challenges could be due, at least in part, to adjusting to the COVID-19 pandemic and new workflows to accommodate the study, they are notable and could have a substantial impact on the larger, planned pragmatic trial and on TM-based MOUD more broadly. Challenges include low rates of identification of risk for OUD from screening, low rates of referral to TM, digital device and internet access issues, workflow and capacity barriers, and insurance coverage. These challenges also highlight the lack of empirical guidance for best TM practice and quality remote care models. With TM expanding rapidly, understanding implementation and demonstrating what TM approaches are effective are critical for ensuring the best care for persons with OUD.

Chronic Pain Among Patients With an Opioid Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Chronic pain is not well understood in opioid-dependent populations. We report the prevalence of chronic pain and pain characteristics in an opioid-dependent population by treatment type and gender. METHODS: This cross-sectional study opportunistically recruited 569 patients (32% women) receiving treatment for opioid use disorder (DSM-5) in Norway during 2016-2018 (83% received opioid maintenance treatment, 17% received treatment without medication). We asked about chronic pain (≥3 months; ICD-11), pain severity (NRS-11), and other pain characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, 55% reported chronic pain (≥3 months), with a higher prevalence among women (61% vs 52%, P = .041) and patients receiving methadone (66%) compared with buprenorphine or no medication (46% and 45%, P < .001). Chronic pain was associated with higher age (P < .001) and higher doses of methadone (P = .048). The average duration of pain was 11 years. The most frequently reported pain locations were the lower extremities (59%) and the back (54%), and 69% reported more than one pain location. Constant pain and migrating pain were significantly associated with both moderate (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.04, confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-3.74 and aOR: 2.44, CI: 1.09-5.43) and severe pain intensity (aOR: 2.08, CI: 1.14-3.80 and aOR: 2.46, CI: 1.10-5.47). Reporting no effect of analgesics was associated with severe pain intensity (aOR: 0.54, CI: 0.29-0.99). CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Over half reported chronic pain, and rates were highest among women and patients receiving methadone. New contributions to the field are descriptions of pain characteristics by gender and pain severity, and interactions between medication type and age. (© 2021 The Authors. The American Journal on Addictions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry). (Am J Addict 2021;00:00-00).

Predictors of Initiation of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder and Retention in Treatment Among U.S. Pregnant Women, 2013-2017.

OBJECTIVE: To describe trends and factors associated with medication administration for opioid use disorder (OUD) and retention in treatment among pregnant women with OUD. METHODS: This is a retrospective, nationwide, cross-sectional analysis of treatment episodes for primary OUD among pregnant women from 2013 to 2017. The primary outcome was initiation of methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone. Secondary outcomes were retention in treatment defined as length of treatment episode lasting six months or greater, and completion of treatment. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were applied to describe trends in, and identify factors associated with the outcomes. RESULTS: There were 42,239 treatment episodes for primary OUD among pregnant women who reported using heroin (65.0%, 27,459), synthetic opioid (33.2%, 14,034), or nonprescribed methadone (1.8%, 746) between 2013 and 2017. Medications for OUD were administered in 47.4% (20,013) of episodes. Retention in treatment occurred in 16.6% of episodes without medications for OUD, and 37.8% of episodes with medications for OUD (P=.01). The rate of medication administration for OUD increased from 41.0% in 2013 to 52.0% in 2017; however, retention rates declined from 39.0% to 33.0% among treatment episodes with medication for OUD. History of at least one prior treatment episode was associated with both administration of medications for OUD and retention in treatment. CONCLUSION: In spite of current guidelines, most treatment episodes for OUD during pregnancy did not involve administration of medications for OUD. Although administration of medications for OUD has improved over time, retention in treatment is lagging. These findings highlight gaps in the U.S. addiction care system.

Access to OUD Treatment and Maintenance of Sobriety amid the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic changed the way that healthcare is delivered, with non-urgent care becoming almost entirely virtual. Underserved communities already battling the opioid epidemic had new challenges in accessing medication assisted treatment (MAT). The investigators sought to determine if patients were retaining access to their opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment and maintaining sobriety during the pandemic, with the intention of using this information to improve subsequent patient care while the pandemic continues. METHODS: In the assessment, seventy-five patient Epic EMR (electronic medical record) charts were reviewed to collect information on demographics, socioeconomic factors, healthcare access and sobriety during the pandemic period between March 1st, 2020 and June 15th, 2020. Patient charts were selected based on those receiving office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) for OUD at an urban healthcare center. RESULTS: 98.7% of patients accessed the healthcare center in some form since March 1st, 2020. The most common form of communication was through telemedicine with 94.6% of calls over audio. Out of the 21 toxicology screens performed during the pandemic period, 16 (76%) patients were found to be adhering to their buprenorphine treatment. Only 78.7% had documented they had Narcan at their disposal. Among all patients, 11 (14.6%) reoccurrences in opioid use were documented during the pandemic period. Few patients (76%) were adhering to their prescribed buprenorphine treatment, revealing that patients may not be receiving needed MAT support amid the pandemic. CONCLUSION: This assessment reveals short-comings of patient education in managing craving and the maintenance of support systems amid social-isolating conditions.

Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare access among patients receiving medication for opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly altered treatment delivery for opioid treatment programs (OTPs) dispensing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). We aimed to identify patterns of substance use among MOUD patients and examine whether COVID-19-related impacts on access to healthcare varied across subgroups. METHODS: This analysis was embedded within a type 3 hybrid trial that enrolled patients across eight OTPs at the start of the pandemic. Enrolled patients reported on past-30 day use of multiple substances during their baseline assessment. Participants re-contacted in May-July 2020 completed a survey about COVID-19-related impacts on various life domains. Using latent class analysis we identified patient subgroups, and then examined group differences on a set of negative and positive COVID-19 impacts related to healthcare access. RESULTS: Of the 188 trial participants, 135 (72 %) completed the survey. Latent class analysis identified three MOUD patient subgroups: minimal use (class probability: 0.25); opioid use (class probability: 0.34); and polysubstance use (class probability: 0.41). Compared to the minimal use group, the polysubstance use group reported increased substance use and difficulty accessing sterile needles, naloxone, and preferred substance. The opioid use group reported increased substance use and difficulty accessing their preferred substance. There were no significant group differences related to accessing routine or specialized healthcare or medication; or paying attention to their health. CONCLUSIONS: During COVID-19, many MOUD patients reported challenges accessing care, particularly harm reduction services for patients with polysubstance use. Additional efforts, like providing wraparound support, may be necessary to serve the needs of MOUD patients.

Association of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment With Alcohol-Related Acute Events.

Importance: Persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) and co-occurring alcohol use disorder (AUD) are understudied and undertreated. It is unknown whether the use of medications to treat OUD is associated with reduced risk of alcohol-related morbidity. Objective: To determine whether the use of OUD medications is associated with decreased risk for alcohol-related falls, injuries, and poisonings in persons with OUD with and without co-occurring AUD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This recurrent-event, case-control, cohort study used prescription claims from IBM MarketScan insurance databases from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2016. The sample included persons aged 12 to 64 years in the US with an OUD diagnosis and taking OUD medication who had at least 1 alcohol-related admission. The unit of observation was person-day. Data analysis was performed from June 26 through September 28, 2020. Exposures: Days of active OUD medication prescriptions, with either agonist (ie, buprenorphine or methadone) or antagonist (ie, oral or extended-release naltrexone) treatments compared with days without OUD prescriptions. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was admission for any acute alcohol-related event defined by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision codes. Conditional logistic regression was used to compare OUD medication use between days with and without an alcohol-related event. Stratified analyses were conducted between patients with OUD with and without a recent AUD diagnostic code. Results: There were 8 424 214 person-days of observation time among 13 335 participants who received OUD medications and experienced an alcohol-related admission (mean [SD] age, 33.1 [13.1] years; 5884 female participants [44.1%]). Agonist treatments (buprenorphine and methadone) were associated with reductions in the odds of any alcohol-related acute event compared with nontreatment days, with a 43% reduction for buprenorphine (odds ratio [OR], 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.61) and a 66% reduction for methadone (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.26-0.45). The antagonist treatment naltrexone was associated with reductions in alcohol-related acute events compared with nonmedication days, with a 37% reduction for extended-release naltrexone (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52-0.76) and a 16% reduction for oral naltrexone (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.93). Naltrexone use was more prevalent among patients with OUD with recent AUD claims than their peers without AUD claims. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that OUD medication is associated with fewer admissions for alcohol-related acute events in patients with OUD with co-occurring AUD.

Associations Between Copays, Coverage Limits for Opioid Use Disorder Medications, and Prescribing in Medicaid, 2018.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) affects millions of Americans, but only a fraction receive treatment. Many patients with OUD are enrolled in Medicaid, but elements of different state Medicaid programs' drug benefit designs may impact patients' access to life-saving care. OBJECTIVE: To describe medication for OUD (mOUD) use in Medicaid and examine the relationship between mOUD use and state drug benefit design plans. DESIGN/SUBJECTS: Cross-sectional study using Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data from 2018 to quantify office-based mOUD and the Medicaid Behavioral Health Services Database to extract copay amounts and coverage limits for mOUD. We excluded states with <5% coverage and assessed for associations between copays or coverage limits and mOUD dispensing using simple linear regression. MEASURES: Proportion of mOUD prescriptions relative to all prescriptions, opioid prescriptions, and the state-level prevalence of pain reliever use disorder and association between copays, coverage limits and these proportions. RESULTS: There was substantial variability in mOUD use. Although state Medicaid drug benefit designs also varied, we found no significant relationship between copay requirements (yes/no), coverage limits (yes/no), copay amount ($0-$0.99 vs. $1 or more), and mOUD utilization measures. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial state-level variation exists in mOUD use, but we did not find a significant association between copays or coverage limits and use in Medicaid. Further research is needed to assess other potential impacts of mOUD drug benefit design elements in Medicaid.

Disparities in Access to Opioid Treatment Programs and Office-Based Buprenorphine Treatment Across the Rural-Urban and Area Deprivation Continua: A US Nationwide Small Area Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To measure access to opioid treatment programs (OTPs) and office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBTs) at the smallest geographic unit for which the Census Bureau publishes demographic and socioeconomic data (ie, block group) and to explore disparities in access to treatment across the rural-urban and area deprivation continua across the United States. METHODS: Access to OTPs and OBBTs at the block group in 2019 was quantified using an innovative 2-step floating catchment area technique that accounts for the supply of treatment facilities relative to the population size, proximity of facilities relative to the location of population in block groups, and time as a barrier within catchments. Block groups were stratified into tertiles based on the rural-urban continuum codes (metropolitan, micropolitan, small town, or rural) and area deprivation index (least-deprived, middle-deprived, most-deprived). The Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation approach was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Across the United States, 3329 block groups corresponding to 2 915 949 adults lacked access to OTPs within a 2-hour drive of their community and 130 block groups corresponding to 86 605 adults did not have access to OBBTs. Disparities in access to treatment were observed across the urban-rural and area deprivation continua including (1) lowest mean access score to OBBTs were found among most-deprived small towns, and (2) lower mean access score to OTPs were found among micropolitan and small towns. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study revealed disparities in access to medication-assisted treatment. The findings call for creative initiatives and local and regional policies to develop to mitigate access problems.

Systematic Evaluation of State Policy Interventions Targeting the US Opioid Epidemic, 2007-2018.

Importance: In response to the increase in opioid overdose deaths in the United States, many states recently have implemented supply-controlling and harm-reduction policy measures. To date, an updated policy evaluation that considers the full policy landscape has not been conducted. Objective: To evaluate 6 US state-level drug policies to ascertain whether they are associated with a reduction in indicators of prescription opioid abuse, the prevalence of opioid use disorder and overdose, the prescription of medication-assisted treatment (MAT), and drug overdose deaths. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used drug overdose mortality data from 50 states obtained from the National Vital Statistics System and claims data from 23 million commercially insured patients in the US between 2007 and 2018. Difference-in-differences analysis using panel matching was conducted to evaluate the prevalence of indicators of prescription opioid abuse, opioid use disorder and overdose diagnosis, the prescription of MAT, and drug overdose deaths before and after implementation of 6 state-level policies targeting the opioid epidemic. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to summarize associations over time for each policy and outcome pair. The data analysis was conducted July 12, 2020. Exposures: State-level drug policy changes to address the increase of opioid-related overdose deaths included prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) access, mandatory PDMPs, pain clinic laws, prescription limit laws, naloxone access laws, and Good Samaritan laws. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes of interests were quarterly state-level mortality from drug overdoses, known indicators for prescription opioid abuse and doctor shopping, MAT, and prevalence of drug overdose and opioid use disorder. Results: This cross-sectional study of drug overdose mortality data and insurance claims data from 23 million commercially insured patients (12 582 378 female patients [55.1%]; mean [SD] age, 45.9 [19.9] years) in the US between 2007 and 2018 found that mandatory PDMPs were associated with decreases in the proportion of patients taking opioids (-0.729%; 95% CI, -1.011% to -0.447%), with overlapping opioid claims (-0.027%; 95% CI, -0.038% to -0.017%), with daily morphine milligram equivalent greater than 90 (-0.095%; 95% CI, -0.150% to -0.041%), and who engaged in drug seeking (-0.002%; 95% CI, -0.003% to -0.001%). The proportion of patients receiving MAT increased after the enactment of mandatory PDMPs (0.015%; 95% CI, 0.002% to 0.028%), pain clinic laws (0.013%, 95% CI, 0.005%-0.021%), and prescription limit laws (0.034%, 95% CI, 0.020% to 0.049%). Mandatory PDMPs were associated with a decrease in the number of overdose deaths due to natural opioids (-518.5 [95% CI, -728.5 to -308.5] per 300 million people) and methadone (-122.7 [95% CI, -207.5 to -37.8] per 300 million people). Prescription drug monitoring program access policies showed similar results, although these policies were also associated with increases in overdose deaths due to synthetic opioids (380.3 [95% CI, 149.6-610.8] per 300 million people) and cocaine (103.7 [95% CI, 28.0-179.5] per 300 million people). Except for the negative association between prescription limit laws and synthetic opioid deaths (-723.9 [95% CI, -1419.7 to -28.1] per 300 million people), other policies were associated with increasing overdose deaths, especially those attributed to non-prescription opioids such as synthetic opioids and heroin. This includes a positive association between naloxone access laws and the number of deaths attributed to synthetic opioids (1338.2 [95% CI, 662.5 to 2014.0] per 300 million people). Conclusions and Relevance: Although this study found that existing state policies were associated with reduced misuse of prescription opioids, they may have the unintended consequence of motivating those with opioid use disorders to access the illicit drug market, potentially increasing overdose mortality. This finding suggests that there is no easy policy solution to reverse the epidemic of opioid dependence and mortality in the US.

Projected Estimates of Opioid Mortality After Community-Level Interventions.

Importance: The United States is experiencing a crisis of opioid overdose. In response, the US Department of Health and Human Services has defined a goal to reduce overdose mortality by 40% by 2022. Objective: To identify specific combinations of 3 interventions (initiating more people to medications for opioid use disorder [MOUD], increasing 6-month retention with MOUD, and increasing naloxone distribution) associated with at least a 40% reduction in opioid overdose in simulated populations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical model used a dynamic population-level state-transition model to project outcomes over a 2-year horizon. Each intervention scenario was compared with the counterfactual of no intervention in simulated urban and rural communities in Massachusetts. Simulation modeling was used to determine the associations of community-level interventions with opioid overdose rates. The 3 examined interventions were initiation of more people to MOUD, increasing individuals' retention with MOUD, and increasing distribution of naloxone. Data were analyzed from July to November 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reduction in overdose mortality, medication treatment capacity needs, and naloxone needs. Results: No single intervention was associated with a 40% reduction in overdose mortality in the simulated communities. Reaching this goal required use of MOUD and naloxone. Achieving a 40% reduction required that 10% to 15% of the estimated OUD population not already receiving MOUD initiate MOUD every month, with 45% to 60%% retention for at least 6 months, and increased naloxone distribution. In all feasible settings and scenarios, attaining a 40% reduction in overdose mortality required that in every month, at least 10% of the population with OUD who were not currently receiving treatment initiate an MOUD. Conclusions and Relevance: In this modeling study, only communities with increased capacity for treating with MOUD and increased MOUD retention experienced a 40% decrease in overdose mortality. These findings could provide a framework for developing community-level interventions to reduce opioid overdose death.