The Rutgers Integrated Care Evaluation (RICE) Research Framework: An Innovative and Rigorous Set of Methods to Evaluate Integrated Care Programs.

Introduction: Integrated care programs that prioritize comprehensive service delivery for behavioural health and medical conditions have the potential to improve patient outcomes. Few programs, however, use data-driven methods to guide program evaluation and implementation, limiting their effectiveness, as well as the scope of findings in the research literature. Purpose: To address these gaps, we describe an innovative and rigorous evaluative research framework: the Rutgers Integrated Care Evaluation (RICE) Research Framework, designed to be tailorable across conditions and care settings. Method: The RICE Research Framework is guided by two core concepts: (1) an approach built on engaging as equal partners and (2) data source triangulation. For the former, the approach relies on multiple teams (Project, Clinical Site, Evaluation, and Consumer) working in collaboration. While teams have specific roles, all teams engage frequently as equal partners to facilitate performance and advance research deliverables. For the latter, we provide a template with recommended primary and secondary data sources with areas of focus, applicable methods, and samples. These sources, when used in combination, can guide implementation, advance replicability, develop/refine health care programs, and foster dissemination of scientific findings. Conclusions: We recommend clinicians and scientists implement the RICE Research Framework to enhance their integrated care programs.

Methadone treatment utilization and overdose trends among Medicaid beneficiaries in New Jersey before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the traditional mode of methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) delivery through the imposition of lockdowns and social distancing measures. In response, policy makers granted flexibilities to providers delivering MMT to change their practices to maintain patient participation while accommodating the measures imposed to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This study examines the utilization of MMT and overdoses of patients receiving MMT during the COVID-19 pandemic in one mid-Atlantic state. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed Medicaid claims data for 2018-2020, calculating weekly trends for starts, discontinuations, and medically-treated overdoses for beneficiaries receiving MMT who had been continuously enrolled in Medicaid for the previous 12 months, to account for changes in the composition of the Medicaid population following the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE). We completed data analyses from January to June 2022. RESULTS: We observed countervailing trends in new starts, which experienced an immediate, non-significant dip of -22.47 per 100,000 Medicaid beneficiaries (95%CI, -50.99 to 6.04) at the outset of the pandemic followed by an increasing upward trend of 1.41 per 100,000 beneficiaries per week (95%CI, 0.37 to 2.46), and in discontinuations, which also experienced an immediate dip of -3.23 per 1000 MMT enrollees (95%CI, -4.49 to -1.97) followed by an increasing upward trend of 0.14 per 1000 MMT enrollees per week (95%CI, 0.09 to 0.19). The net result of these shifts was a stable, slowly increasing rate of MMT treatment of 0.02 % per week before and after the PHE. We also found no statistically significant association of the PHE with medically-treated overdoses among beneficiaries enrolled in MMT (trend change = 0.02 overdoses per 10,000 MMT enrollees, 95%CI, -0.05 to 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: New Jersey achieved overall stability in MMT treatment prevalence following the pandemic's onset, while some changes in treatment dynamics took place. This outcome may reflect that the extensive flexibilities granted to providers of MMT by the state and federal government successfully maintained access to MMT for Medicaid beneficiaries through the pandemic without increasing risk of medically-treated overdose. These findings should inform policy makers developing the post-COVID-19 legal and regulatory landscape.

Artificial Neural Network Analysis Examining Substance Use Problems Co-Occurring with Anxiety and Depressive Disorders Among Adults Receiving Mental Health Treatment.

Objective: The co-occurrence of anxiety disorders, depressive disorders, and substance use problems was examined. Methods: The Mental Health Client-Level Data dataset was used to conduct logistic regression models and an artificial neural network analysis. Logistic regression analyses were conducted among adults with anxiety (n = 547,473) or depressive disorders (n = 1,610,601) as their primary diagnosis who received treatment in a community mental health center. The artificial neural network analysis was conducted with the entire sample (N = 2,158,074). Results: Approximately 30% of the sample had co-occurring high-risk substance use or substance use disorder. Characteristics including region of treatment receipt, age, education, gender, race and ethnicity, and the presence of co-occurring anxiety and depressive disorders were associated with the co-occurring high-risk substance use or a substance use disorder. Conclusions: Findings from this study highlight the importance of mental health facilities to screen for and provide integrated treatment for co-occurring disorders.

Mediational pathways among drug use initiation, use-related consequences, and quit attempts.

Background: Factors that predict attempts to discontinue drug use are clinically relevant and may inform treatment. This study investigated drug use-related consequences as a predictor of drug quit attempts and treatment seeking among two cohorts of persons who use drugs. Methods: Drug use and clinical characteristics were assessed among persons who use cocaine (N=176; urine-verified; 'Cocaine Cohort') and among those who use heroin (N=166; urine-verified; 'Heroin Cohort'). Mediation analyses assessed relationships among age at initial drug use, adverse drug-specific use-related consequences, and drug-specific quit attempts, separately for each cohort. Forward conditional logistic regression models evaluated drug use and clinical symptom scores as predictors of drug-specific treatment seeking. Results: Controlling for age, mediation models showed that drug use consequences fully mediated the relationship between age at initial drug use and number of drug-specific quit attempts for the 'Cocaine Cohort' and 'Heroin Cohort' (R2=0.30, p<.001; R2=0.17, p<.001; respectively). Reporting more consequences predicted more quit attempts in each cohort, accounting for duration of use (ps<.001). Reporting more consequences also predicted greater likelihood of seeking drug use treatment (ps<.001) and was associated with more severe clinical symptoms in each cohort (ps<.05). Conclusions: Using a parallel analysis design, we showed that reporting more drug-specific use-related consequences predicted more drug-specific quit attempts and greater likelihood to seek treatment in two cohorts: persons who use cocaine and those who use heroin. Our findings suggest that experiencing more drug use consequences predicts more attempts to seek drug abstinence and that assessment of consequences may be informative for treatment.

Decreases in Employer Referrals to First-Time Substance Use Treatment for Adults From 2004 to 2020.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to examine trends of employer/employee assistance program referred admissions to outpatient substance use disorder (SUD) treatment in the United States. METHODS: The publicly available Treatment Episode Data Set was used. Full-time employed adults with no history of SUD treatment referred to outpatient treatment by an employer/employee assistance program from 2004 to 2020 were included ( N = 36,142). Joinpoint regression examined admission trends. RESULTS: Employer/employee assistance program referred admissions to outpatient treatment decreased annually by 6.4% from 2004 to 2020 ( P < 0.001). Joinpoint analyses identified 2 linear segments from 2004 to 2008 (increased but not significant) and from 2008 to 2020. From 2008 to 2020, an average annual percent decrease of 8.7% ( P < 0.001) was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this repeated cross-sectional study suggest a missed opportunity for workplaces to serve as a potential SUD treatment access point.

Experiences of healthcare and substance use treatment provider-based stigma among patients receiving methadone.

Background: Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) are efficacious, however only one-third of individuals with an opioid use disorder (OUD) enter into treatment. Low rates of MOUD utilization are partially due to stigma. This study examines provider-based stigma toward MOUD and identifies factors associated with experiencing stigma related to MOUD from substance use treatment and healthcare providers among people receiving methadone. Methods: Clients receiving MOUD at an opioid treatment program (N = 247) were recruited to complete a cross-sectional computer-based survey assessing socio-demographics, substance use, depression and anxiety symptoms, self-stigma, and recovery supports/barriers. Logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with hearing negative comments about MOUD from substance use treatment and healthcare providers. Results: 27.9% and 56.7% of respondents reported they sometimes/often hear negative comments about MOUD from substance use treatment and healthcare providers, respectively. Logistic regression results indicate that individuals who experience more negative consequences resulting from their OUD (OR=1.09, p=.019) had greater odds of hearing negative comments from substance use treatment providers. Age (OR=0.966, p=.017) and treatment stigma (OR=1.42, p=.030) were associated with greater odds of hearing negative comments from healthcare providers. Conclusions: Stigma can be a deterrent to seeking substance use treatment, healthcare, and recovery support. Understanding factors associated with experiencing stigma from substance use treatment providers and healthcare providers is important as these individuals may act as advocates for those with OUD. This study highlights individual factors associated with hearing negative comments about methadone and other MOUD and point to areas for targeted education.

Differences in intent to refer buprenorphine among community correctional and treatment staff: A set of cross-lagged models predicting efficacy beliefs and familiarity with buprenorphine for opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite high rates of individuals with opioid use disorder, community correctional agencies underutilize medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Knowledge about the mechanisms which motivate correctional employees to refer buprenorphine remains underdeveloped, and differences in these patterns by employee status are unknown. This study has two objectives: (1) investigate the presence of a reciprocal relationship between familiarity with buprenorphine and efficacy beliefs among community corrections and community treatment staff and (2) identify whether this relationship differs by staff status in referral intentions. METHODS: Data were used from the Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies 2 (CJ-DATS 2) among correctional and treatment employees (N = 873). Four models investigated whether a reciprocal relationship existed between buprenorphine familiarity and efficacy beliefs. Then, the best fitting model was used to test the influence that prior training had on future referral intention through familiarity and efficacy beliefs among the analytic sample (n = 612), by comparing two separate structural equation models (SEMs) among correctional staff and treatment staff, respectively. RESULTS: The fully cross-lagged model provided a significantly better fit to the data than other models ( χ diff 2 ${\chi }_{\mathrm{diff}}^{2}$ (1) = 7.189, p < .01). The results of the multigroup SEM show that training had positive, indirect effects on future referral intentions that significantly differed between treatment and community correction staff. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Findings show that training may influence correctional staff intent to refer individuals to receive buprenorphine through familiarity. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Tailored training for MOUD treatment for specific staff populations may prove more beneficial than existing approaches.

Exploring potential moderators of depressive symptoms and treatment outcomes among patients with opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms are common in patients seeking medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD treatment) and decrease quality of life but have been inconsistently related to opioid treatment outcomes. Here, we explore whether depressive symptoms may only be related to adverse treatment outcomes among individuals reporting high opioid use-related coping motives (i.e., use of opioids to change affective states) and high trait impulsivity, two common treatment targets. METHODS: Patients seeking MOUD treatment (N = 118) completed several questionnaires within two weeks of their treatment intake. Treatment outcomes (opioid-positive urine screens and days retained in treatment) were extracted from treatment records. Moderation analyses controlling for demographic characteristics and main effects were conducted to explore interaction effects between depressive symptoms and two distinct moderators. RESULTS: Depressive symptoms were only related to opioid use during early treatment among patients reporting high opioid use-related coping motives (B = 2.67, p =.004) and patients reporting high trait impulsivity (B = 2.01, p =.039). Further, depressive symptoms were only inversely related to days retained among individuals with high opioid use-related coping motives (B = -10.12, p =.003). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals presenting to treatment with opioid-related coping motives and/or impulsivity in the context of depressive symptoms may confer unique risk for adverse treatment outcomes. Clinicians may wish to consider these additive risk factors when developing their treatment plan.

Advancing the behavioral health workforce: An innovative integrated care and substance use disorder training model to improve outcomes for people in medically underserved communities.

INTRODUCTION: It is critical that we strengthen the ability of the behavioral health workforce to better manage the complex behavioral and physical health needs of people in medically underserved areas. Despite the knowledge that integrated care (IC) models improve patient outcomes and experience, provider satisfaction, and health care costs, educational and experiential training in IC is limited, limiting workforce capacity to deliver this care. METHOD: Through the Health Resources and Services Administration-funded Rutgers University Integrated Substance Use Disorder Training Program (RUISTP), we partner with community-based primary care clinics to implement an interprofessional fellowship program for psychologists, social workers, physician assistants, and advanced practice nurses. The RUISTP simultaneously provides training and implements IC within these community-based systems. Our multiple-methods evaluation design examines data-driven indicators of feasibility, uptake, and program success during implementation and sustainability phases and assesses changes in organizational beliefs and practices, provider competencies, and service utilization throughout the project period. RESULTS: This article describes the significance and innovation of (a) an IC training program, (b) an implementation plan for sustained change within systems of care, and (c) evaluative methodology to assess and improve IC and SUD service delivery and training. These data will be used to create a template for other academic and health care systems nationally. DISCUSSION: It is the mission of this program to use an innovative training, implementation, and evaluation design to enhance IC and SUD services, bolster the behavioral health workforce trained to provide high-quality IC, and inform replications of this model in other geographic and clinical settings, particularly those in medically underserved communities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Impact of an osteopathic peer recovery coaching model on treatment outcomes in high-risk men entering residential treatment for substance use disorders.

CONTEXT: The United States has witnessed a disproportionate rise in substance use disorders (SUD) and co-occurring mental health disorders, paired with housing instability, especially among racially minoritized communities. Traditional in-patient residential treatment programs for SUD have proven inconsistent in their effectiveness in preventing relapse and maintaining attrition among these patient populations. There is evidence showing that peer recovery programs led by individuals who have lived experience with SUD can increase social support and foster intrinsic motivation within participants to bolster their recovery. These peer recovery programs, when coupled with a standardized training program for peer recovery coaches, may be very efficacious at improving patient health outcomes, boosting performance on Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) national outcome measures (NOMs), and helping participants build an overall better quality of life. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study is to highlight the efficacy of a peer recovery program, the Minority Aids Initiative, in improving health outcomes and associated NOMs in men with SUD and/or co-occurring mental health disorder. METHODS: Participants received six months of peer recovery coaching from trained staff. Sessions were guided by the Manual for Recovery Coaching and focused on 10 different domains of recovery. Participants and coaches set long-term goals and created weekly action plans to work toward them. Standardized assessments (SAMHSA's Government Performance and Results Act [GPRA] tool, Addiction Severity Index [ASI]) were administered by recovery coaches at intake and at the 6-month time point to evaluate participant progress. Analyses of participant recovery were carried out according to SAMHSA's six NOMs and assessed the outcomes of the intervention and their significance. RESULTS: A total of 115 participants enrolled in the program over a 2-year period. Among them, 53 were eligible for 6-month follow-up interviews. In total, 321 sessions were held, with an average of three sessions per participant. Participants showed marked improvement across five of the six NOMs at the end of the 6-month course and across all ASI outcomes, with the exception of three in which participants reported an absence or few symptoms at intake. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that participants receive benefits across nearly all NOM categories when paired with recovery coaches who are well trained in medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) over a 6-month period. We see the following: a higher rate of abstinence; increased housing stability; lower health, behavioral, and social consequences; lower depression and anxiety; longer participant-recovery coach exposure time; and higher follow-up rates. We hope that our results can contribute to advancements and greater acceptance in the implementation of peer recovery coaching as well as an improvement in the lives of the communities affected by substance use.

Cumulative barriers to retention in methadone treatment among adults from rural and small urban communities.

BACKGROUND: Though methadone has been shown to effectively treat opioid use disorder, many barriers prevent individuals from accessing and maintaining treatment. Barriers are prevalent in less populated areas where treatment options are limited. This study examines barriers to retention in methadone treatment in a small Midwest community and identifies factors associated with greater endorsement of barriers. METHODS: Patients at an opioid treatment program (N = 267) were recruited to complete a computer-based survey onsite. Surveys assessed demographics, opioid misuse, depression and anxiety symptoms, trauma history and symptoms, social support, and barriers to retention in treatment (e.g., childcare, work, housing, transportation, legal obligations, cost, health). Descriptive statistics were used to examine individual barriers and multiple regression was calculated to identify demographic and psychosocial factors associated with greater cumulative barriers. RESULTS: Most participants reported at least one barrier to retention in treatment and more than half reported multiple barriers. Travel hardships and work conflicts were the most highly endorsed barriers. Past year return to use (B = 2.31, p = 0.004) and more severe mental health symptomology (B = 0.20, p = 0.038) were associated with greater cumulative barriers. Greater levels of social support were associated with fewer barriers (B = - 0.23, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study adds to the limited research on barriers to retention in methadone treatment among patients in rural and small urban communities. Findings suggest flexible regulations for dispensing methadone, co-location or care coordination, and family or peer support programs may further reduce opioid use and related harms in small communities. Individuals with past year return to use reported a greater number of barriers, highlighting the time following return to use as critical for wraparound services and support. Those with co-occurring mental health issues may be vulnerable to poor treatment outcomes, as evidenced by greater endorsement of barriers. As social support emerged as a protective factor, efforts to strengthen informal support networks should be explored as adjunctive services to methadone treatment.

Comorbid Affective and Substance Use Disorders of Medicaid/Medicare Beneficiaries at an Opioid Treatment Program Serving Small Urban and Rural Communities.

Objectives: Identify rates and correlates of comorbid affective and substance use disorders among an understudied population, Medicaid/Medicare beneficiaries receiving care at an opioid treatment program serving patients from small urban and rural areas. Examine whether past-year non-medical opioid use status differentiates comorbidity status. Methods: A cross-sectional, venue-based design was used to recruit a convenience sample of patients treated with methadone for opioid use disorder. Measures were assessed across three domains: (1) demographic characteristics, (2) opioid use characteristics, and (3) comorbid disorders. Brief validated screeners categorized probable comorbid disorders. Bivariate analyses examined correlates of comorbid disorders and determined variable selection for multivariable analyses. Results: In this sample (N = 210; mean age = 38.5 years; female = 62.2%; Non-Hispanic White race/ethnicity = 86.1%), comorbid disorders were common. Rates were as follows: current anxiety (48.1%), depression (41.1%), and PTSD (33.7%), and past-year stimulant (27.6%), marijuana (19.0%), alcohol (14.9%), and sedative (7.6%). In bivariate analyses, past-year non-medical opioid use and a greater accumulation of opioid use consequences were associated with most disorders. When including demographic and opioid use characteristics in multivariable analyses, past-year non-medical opioid use was associated with anxiety, PTSD, stimulant use disorder, and sedative use disorder. Conclusions: Few studies have investigated comorbid disorders among this understudied population. This analysis highlights a high burden, especially for affective disorders. Our findings demonstrate that routine, ongoing assessment of non-medical opioid use may be a promising and feasible strategy to detect patients needing integrated care. Future research should investigate whether changes to assessment protocols at opioid treatment programs in small urban and rural settings facilitate care coordination.

An examination of correlates of simultaneous opioid and benzodiazepine use among patients in medication treatment for opioid use disorder in a small midwestern community.

Background: Concurrent and/or simultaneous use of opioids and benzodiazepines has been associated with increased risk of accident and injury, as well as with co-occurring psychopathology. Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to explore potential correlates of simultaneous opioid and benzodiazepine use in a small community, including perceived risk, positive screens for psychiatric symptoms, and opioid-related consequences. Methods: A sample of 267 participants were recruited from a medication treatment provider that serves a small Midwestern community. Multinomial logistic regression was used to explore demographic and mental health correlates associated with self-reports of past-year simultaneous use. Zero-inflated Poisson regression was used to explore past-year consequences associated with reported simultaneous benzodiazepine and opioid use. Results: Intentional simultaneous use of opioids and benzodiazepines was associated with greater anxiety and depression symptoms, greater likelihood of a positive PTSD screen, and low self-perceived risk of simultaneous use. Individuals reporting opioid/benzodiazepine simultaneous use were also more likely to report opioid-related consequences. Conclusions: Results highlight the importance of assessing and treating simultaneous opioid/benzodiazepine co-use, as well as relevant comorbidities.

Comparisons of injection and non-injection opioid use among Black people in methadone treatment: A pilot in Detroit.

Rates of injection drug use (IDU) of opioids have been consistently lower among Black people relative to Non-Hispanic White people despite rising IDU estimates. While explanations have been proposed, no study has explored differences within a clinical sample of Black people in treatment who prefer IDU to non-IDU opioid administration. The purpose of this pilot study was to explore these differences guided by a seminal framework (e.g., market force, social network, and risk-taking characteristics), along with mental health symptoms, needle phobia, and injection perception variables. A purposive sample of 50 Black participants (58.0% male) were recruited from an opioid treatment program in Detroit by their preference for IDU (n = 16) versus non-IDU. The IDU group was younger, less educated, and younger at first treatment episode. They were more likely to report having been told they had bipolar disorder, PTSD, or anxiety, receiving mental health services as adults, and have a spouse/partner and close friends who injected opioids. The non-IDU group endorsed more symptoms of needle phobia. The non-IDU group also agreed more with statements that family and friends believe police mistreat people who inject drugs, and that people who inject opioids have a harder time quitting, are more likely to die from overdose, and have a harder time hiding it from family. These initial findings provide a rationale for a larger study with sex-specific analysis on factors associated with IDU among Black people to inform harm reduction efforts.

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.

Predictors of Safe Prescription Opioid Storage and Participation in Drug Take-Back Events: Results from a Statewide Survey.

Improper storage and disposal of prescribed opioids can lead to diversion or accidental poisonings. Studies of emergency department and cancer patients suggest prescription opioids are rarely stored securely or disposed of when unneeded. Safe storage and disposal practices reduce risks for others living in or visiting a household. The purpose of this study is thus to examine prescription opioid storage and participation in drug take-back events among Michigan adults. Participants (N = 702) were recruited through social media advertisements to complete an online survey in July and August 2018. Logistic regression was used to examine correlates of safe storage and disposal. 8.4% (n = 59) of participants reported always keeping opioids locked; 29.8% (n = 209) reported attending a drug take-back event. Black participants and those who believed that illegal drug use was a serious problem had greater odds of locking opioids; participants with higher levels of education or who knew someone who used heroin or misused prescription opioids had lesser odds of locking opioids. Age and race were associated with take-back event participation. Findings identify factors associated with safe prescription opioid storage/disposal and indicate safe storage/disposal seldom occurs. Education and provision of safe storage equipment should be designed for diverse ages, races/ethnicities, and levels of education. Drug take-back events not hosted by law enforcement may have broader appeal, as may those led by Black or other people of color. Wider use of drug donation boxes may facilitate increased disposal among those who do not wish to or cannot attend take-back events.

A Comparison of Substance Use Patterns Among Lifetime Heroin-Injecting Individuals By Racial Groups.

BACKGROUND: Studies have identified differential substance use patterns by racial groups. One of the most commonly reported differences is a higher rate of injection drug use (IDU) among Non-Hispanic Whites compared to African Americans, but this is complicated by factors related to IDU (e.g., earlier drug-use initiation) that overlap with being White. OBJECTIVE: We explored differential substance use-patterns by racial groups within a sample of injection heroin users. METHODS: Substance-use data were collected from 373 not-in-treatment heroin users who endorsed any lifetime injection use (69.4% male). We examined differences in substance-use patterns (e.g., age of initiation, gateway adherence) by racial groups. Multiple t-tests with Bonferroni correction were conducted to understand which demographic and substance-use characteristics varied by racial groups. RESULTS: Relative to Non-Hispanic Whites, African Americans (45.8% of sample) were more likely to start using heroin earlier in their life, but also more likely to experience a longer delay between starting and regularly using heroin. We also identified differences in the degree of (injection) heroin-use consequences by racial groups. After correcting for multiple comparisons and controlling for age and gender, we observed differences for six substance-use and demographic characteristics by racial group. White participants were younger, started cocaine use earlier, and experienced more heroin-use consequences across two separate domains. CONCLUSIONS: After controlling for injection use, we observed differential substance-use characteristics by racial groups. The findings could be used to develop targeted prevention and harm-reduction strategies.

Opioid prescribing and opioid-overdose deaths in Michigan: Urban-rural comparisons and changes across 2013-2017.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-overdose deaths and opioid prescriptions have increased substantially within the past decade, leading to examinations of urban-rural differences for these opioid-related outcomes, and whether annual trends differ by urban-rural status. Most investigations have examined differences using national data, whereas few studies have identified patterns in hard-hit regions. Therefore, we examined urban-rural differences for opioid-related outcomes in Michigan, a state with overdose death and prescribing rates above the national average. METHODS: This study used county-level public data on opioid prescribing and opioid-overdose death rates in Michigan. Bivariate and joinpoint regression analyses tested for annual differences and annual changes in opioid-related outcomes across 2013-2017. Rural Urban Continuum Codes classified urban-rural county status. RESULTS: Bivariate analyses demonstrated that urban counties had consistently higher opioid-overdose death rates than rural, whereas rural counties had consistently higher opioid prescribing rates than urban. Joinpoint regression (2013-2017) revealed opioid-overdose death rates increased in urban (Annual Percent Change = 25.0%, p = .001) and rural counties (Annual Percent Change = 21.7%, p = .002), though no changes for opioid prescribing rates were observed among urban or rural counties. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights nuanced urban-rural patterns in Michigan, a hard-hit state, compared to trends in national data. Both urban and rural counties experienced rising rates of opioid-overdose deaths, and rural counties experienced higher opioid prescribing rates than urban. Though urban counties experienced higher opioid-overdose death rates than rural, the rise in both county types was similar. Future research directions, implications for public health, and healthcare policy recommendations are discussed.

Public Perceptions of Risks Associated with Mixing Opioid Pain-Relievers with Alcohol and Benzodiazepines.

Objectives: Use of alcohol or benzodiazepines with opioid pain-relievers increases risk of overdose and overdose death. A substantial proportion of adults receives an opioid prescription each year, and a number of these adults also use benzodiazepines or alcohol. As public opinion continues to shape public policy, it is imperative to understand correlates of recognizing risk of mixing substances in order to inform public outreach and prevention efforts. Methods: Characteristics associated with perceived risk were explored using an online survey of a community sample of adults (N = 639) in Michigan. Two logistic regression models examined potential correlates of perceived risk of 1) mixing opioid pain-relievers with alcohol and 2) mixing opioid pain-relievers with benzodiazepines. Results: In the multivariate results, participants reporting at least one heavy drinking episode in the past month (AOR = 0.46, p = .001) and individuals with advanced degrees (AOR = 0.49, p = .014) had lower odds of believing that mixing alcohol and opioid pain-relievers poses a great risk, while women (AOR = 1.66, p = .042) had higher odds. Participants reporting lifetime (AOR = 0.58, p = .046) or past-year (AOR = 0.28, p = .001) non-medical opioid use had lower odds of reporting that mixing benzodiazepines and opioid pain-relievers poses a great risk, whereas older participants (AOR = 1.02, p = .037) had higher odds. Conclusions: Certain groups were more likely to underestimate risks of mixing opioid pain-relievers with alcohol or benzodiazepines. Results underscore the importance of targeted public awareness campaigns, prevention programing, and communication between physicians and patients about the risks of mixing substances, particularly among high-risk groups.