Unintended consequences of methadone regulation for opioid use disorder treatment among hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, there are no federal restrictions on the use of methadone to manage opioid withdrawal symptoms when patients are hospitalized with a medical or surgical condition other than addiction. In contrast, in an outpatient setting, methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly regulated by federal and state governments and can only be dispensed from an opioid treatment program (OTP). Discrepancies in regulatory requirements across these settings may lead to barriers in care for patients with OUD. OBJECTIVE: Identify how methadone regulation impacts the care of patients with OUD during hospitalization, care transitions, and in the OTP setting. METHODS: We completed 26 interviews with clinicians and social workers working on hospital-based addiction consultation services across the United States. Study findings are the result of a secondary content analysis of interviews to identifying the word "methadone" and construct themes resulting from the data. RESULTS: We identified three major themes related to "methadone" for OUD treatment, all of which impacted patient care: (1) limited OTP hours leads to tenuous or delayed hospital discharges; (2) inadequate information-sharing between hospitals and OTPs leads to delays in care; and (3) methadone regulations create treatment barriers for the most vulnerable patients. CONCLUSION: Strict methadone regulations have resulted in unintended consequences for patients with OUD in the hospital setting, during care transitions, and in the OTP setting. Recent and ongoing federal efforts to reform methadone provision may improve some of the reported challenges, but significant hurdles remain in providing safe, equitable care to hospitalized patients with OUD.

The Impact of Completing X-Waiver Training and Clinical Addiction Exposure on Internal Medicine Residents Treating Patients With Opioid Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Treating opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine or methadone significantly reduces overdose and all-cause mortality. Prior studies demonstrate that clinicians and residents reported a lack of preparedness to diagnose or treat OUD. Little is known about how clinical exposure or buprenorphine X-waiver training impacts OUD care delivery by resident physicians. OBJECTIVE: Distinguish the effects of X-waiver training and clinical exposure with OUD on resident's knowledge, attitudes, feelings of preparedness, and practices related to OUD treatment provision. METHODS: From August 2021 to April 2022, we distributed a cross-sectional survey to internal medicine residents at a large academic training program. We analyzed associations between self-reported clinical exposure and X-waiver training across 4 domains: knowledge about best practices for OUD treatment, attitudes about patients with OUD, preparedness to treat OUD, and clinical experience with OUD. RESULTS: Of the 188 residents surveyed, 91 responded (48%). A majority of respondents had not completed X-waiver training (60%, n = 55) while many had provided clinical care to patients with OUD (65%, n = 59). Most residents had favorable attitudes about OUD treatment (97%). Both residents with clinical exposure to treating OUD and X-waiver training, and residents with clinical exposure without X-waiver training, felt more prepared to treat OUD (P < .0008) compared to residents with neither clinical exposure or X-waiver training or only X-waiver training. CONCLUSIONS: Residents with clinical exposure to treating OUD are more prepared to treat patients with OUD than those without clinical exposure. Greater efforts to incorporate clinical exposure to the treatment of OUD and education in internal medicine residency programs is imperative to address the opioid epidemic.

In-Hospital Methadone Enrollment: a Novel Program to Facilitate Linkage from the Hospital to the Opioid Treatment Program for Vulnerable Patients with Opioid Use Disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Methadone ameliorates opioid withdrawal among hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). To continue methadone after hospital discharge, patients must enroll in an opioid treatment program (OTP) per federal regulations. Uncontrolled opioid withdrawal is a barrier to linkage from hospital to OTP. AIM: Describe a federally compliant In-Hospital Methadone Enrollment Team (IN-MEET) that enrolls hospitalized patients with OUD into an OTP with facilitated hospital to OTP linkage. SETTING: Seven hundred-bed university hospital in Aurora, CO. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: A physician dually affiliated with a hospital's addiction consultation service and a community OTP completes an in-hospital, face-to-face medical assessment required by federal law and titrates methadone to comfort. An OTP-affiliated nurse with hospital privileges completes a psychosocial evaluation and provides case management by arranging transportation and providing weekly telephone check-ins. PROGRAM EVALUATION METRICS: IN-MEET enrollments completed, hospital to OTP linkage, and descriptive characteristics of patients who completed IN-MEET enrollments compared to patients who completed community OTP enrollments. RESULTS: Between April 2019 and April 2023, our team completed 165 IN-MEET enrollments. Among a subset of 73 IN-MEET patients, 56 (76.7%) presented to the OTP following hospital discharge. Compared to community OTP enrolled patients (n = 1687), a higher percentage of IN-MEET patients were older (39.7 years, standard deviation [SD] 11.2 years vs. 36.1 years, SD 10.6 years) and were unhoused (n = 43, 58.9% vs. n = 199, 11.8%). Compared to community OTP enrolled patients, a higher percentage of IN-MEET patients reported heroin or fentanyl as their primary substance (n = 53, 72.6% vs. n = 677, 40.1%), reported methamphetamine as their secondary substance (n = 27, 37.0% vs. n = 380, 22.5%), and reported they injected their primary substance (n = 46, 63.0% vs. n = 478, 28.3%). CONCLUSION: IN-MEET facilitates hospital to OTP linkage among a vulnerable population. This model has the potential to improve methadone access for hospitalized patients who may not otherwise seek out treatment.

Barriers to initiate buprenorphine and methadone for opioid use disorder treatment with postdischarge treatment linkage.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals are an essential site of care for people with opioid use disorder (OUD). Buprenorphine and methadone are underutilized in the hospital. OBJECTIVES: Characterize barriers to in-hospital buprenorphine or methadone initiation to inform implementation strategies to increase OUD treatment provision. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Survey of hospital-based clinicians' perceptions of OUD treatment from 12 hospitals conducted between June 2022 and August 2022. MEASURES: Survey questions were grouped into six domains: (1) evidence to treat OUD, (2) hospital processes to treat OUD, (3) buprenorphine or methadone initiation, (4) clinical practices to treat OUD, (5) leadership prioritization of OUD treatment, and (6) job satisfaction. Likert responses were dichotomized and associations between "readiness" to initiate buprenorphine or methadone and each domain were assessed. RESULTS: Of 160 respondents (60% response rate), 72 (45%) reported higher readiness to initiate buprenorphine compared to methadone, 55 (34%). Respondents with higher readiness to initiate medications for OUD were more likely to perceive that evidence supports the use of buprenorphine and methadone to treat OUD (p < .001), to perceive fewer barriers to treat OUD (p < .001), to incorporate OUD treatment into their clinical practice (p < .001), to perceive leadership support for OUD treatment (p < .007), and to have great job satisfaction (p < .04). Clinicians reported that OUD treatment protocols with treatment linkage, increased education, and addiction specialist support would facilitate OUD treatment provision. CONCLUSION: Interventions that incorporate protocols to initiate medications for OUD, include addiction specialist support and education, and ensure postdischarge OUD treatment linkage could facilitate hospital-based OUD treatment provision.

Estimated Clinical Outcomes and Cost-effectiveness Associated With Provision of Addiction Treatment in US Primary Care Clinics.

Importance: US primary care practitioners (PCPs) are the largest clinical workforce, but few provide addiction care. Primary care is a practical place to expand addiction services, including buprenorphine and harm reduction kits, yet the clinical outcomes and health care sector costs are unknown. Objective: To estimate the long-term clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of integrated buprenorphine and harm reduction kits in primary care for people who inject opioids. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this modeling study, the Reducing Infections Related to Drug Use Cost-Effectiveness (REDUCE) microsimulation model, which tracks serious injection-related infections, overdose, hospitalization, and death, was used to examine the following treatment strategies: (1) PCP services with external referral to addiction care (status quo), (2) PCP services plus onsite buprenorphine prescribing with referral to offsite harm reduction kits (BUP), and (3) PCP services plus onsite buprenorphine prescribing and harm reduction kits (BUP plus HR). Model inputs were derived from clinical trials and observational cohorts, and costs were discounted annually at 3%. The cost-effectiveness was evaluated over a lifetime from the modified health care sector perspective, and sensitivity analyses were performed to address uncertainty. Model simulation began January 1, 2021, and ran for the entire lifetime of the cohort. Main Outcomes and Measures: Life-years (LYs), hospitalizations, mortality from sequelae (overdose, severe skin and soft tissue infections, and endocarditis), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results: The simulated cohort included 2.25 million people and reflected the age and gender of US persons who inject opioids. Status quo resulted in 6.56 discounted LYs at a discounted cost of $203 500 per person (95% credible interval, $203 000-$222 000). Each strategy extended discounted life expectancy: BUP by 0.16 years and BUP plus HR by 0.17 years. Compared with status quo, BUP plus HR reduced sequelae-related mortality by 33%. The mean discounted lifetime cost per person of BUP and BUP plus HR were more than that of the status quo strategy. The dominating strategy was BUP plus HR. Compared with status quo, BUP plus HR was cost-effective (ICER, $34 400 per LY). During a 5-year time horizon, BUP plus HR cost an individual PCP practice approximately $13 000. Conclusions and Relevance: This modeling study of integrated addiction service in primary care found improved clinical outcomes and modestly increased costs. The integration of addiction service into primary care practices should be a health care system priority.

External validation of a model to predict future chronic opioid use among hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous research demonstrates an association between opioid prescribing at hospital discharge and future chronic opioid use. Various opioid guidelines and policies contributed to changes in opioid prescribing practices. How this affected hospitalized patients remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: Externally validate a prediction model to identify hospitalized patients at the highest risk for future chronic opioid therapy (COT). DESIGNS: Retrospective analysis of health record data from 2011 to 2022 using logistic regression. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized adults with limited to no opioid use 1-year prior to hospitalization. SETTINGS: A statewide healthcare system. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Used variables associated with progression to COT in a derivation cohort from a different healthcare system to predict expected outcomes in the validation cohort. KEY RESULTS: The derivation cohort included 17,060 patients, of whom 9653 (56.6%) progressed to COT 1 year after discharge. Compared to the derivation cohort, in the validation cohort, patients who received indigent care (odds ratio [OR] = 0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.27-0.59, p < .001) were least likely to progress to COT. Among variables assessed, opioid receipt at discharge was most strongly associated with progression to COT (OR = 3.74, 95% CI = 3.06-4.61, p < .001). The receiver operating characteristic curve for the validation set using coefficients from the derivation cohort performed slightly better than chance (AUC = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the importance of externally validating a prediction model prior to use outside of the derivation population. Periodic updates to models are necessary as policy changes and clinical practice recommendations may affect model performance.

Management of opioid use disorder and associated conditions among hospitalized adults: A Consensus Statement from the Society of Hospital Medicine.

Hospital-based clinicians frequently care for patients with opioid withdrawal or opioid use disorder (OUD) and are well-positioned to identify and initiate treatment for these patients. With rising numbers of hospitalizations related to opioid use and opioid-related overdose, the Society of Hospital Medicine convened a working group to develop a Consensus Statement on the management of OUD and associated conditions among hospitalized adults. The guidance statement is intended for clinicians practicing medicine in the inpatient setting (e.g., hospitalists, primary care physicians, family physicians, advanced practice nurses, and physician assistants) and is intended to apply to hospitalized adults at risk for, or diagnosed with, OUD. To develop the Consensus Statement, the working group conducted a systematic review of relevant guidelines and composed a draft statement based on extracted recommendations. Next, the working group obtained feedback on the draft statement from external experts in addiction medicine, SHM members, professional societies, harm reduction organizations and advocacy groups, and peer reviewers. The iterative development process resulted in a final Consensus Statement consisting of 18 recommendations covering the following topics: (1) identification and treatment of OUD and opioid withdrawal, (2) perioperative and acute pain management in patients with OUD, and (3) methods to optimize care transitions at hospital discharge for patients with OUD. Most recommendations in the Consensus Statement were derived from guidelines based on observational studies and expert consensus. Due to the lack of rigorous evidence supporting key aspects of OUD-related care, the working group identified important issues necessitating future research and exploration.

Management of opioid use disorder, opioid withdrawal, and opioid overdose prevention in hospitalized adults: A systematic review of existing guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations related to the consequences of opioid use are rising. National guidelines directing in-hospital opioid use disorder (OUD) management do not exist. OUD treatment guidelines intended for other treatment settings could inform in-hospital OUD management. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the quality and content of existing guidelines for OUD treatment and management. DATA SOURCES: OVID MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid PsychINFO, EBSCOhost CINHAL, ERCI Guidelines Trust, websites of relevant societies and advocacy organizations, and selected international search engines. STUDY SELECTION: Guidelines published between January 2010 to June 2020 addressing OUD treatment, opioid withdrawal management, opioid overdose prevention, and care transitions among adults. DATA EXTRACTION: We assessed quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nineteen guidelines met the selection criteria. Most recommendations were based on observational studies or expert consensus. Guidelines recommended the use of nonstigmatizing language among patients with OUD; to assess patients with unhealthy opioid use for OUD using the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Diseases-5th Edition criteria; use of methadone or buprenorphine to treat OUD and opioid withdrawal; use of multimodal, nonopioid therapy, and when needed, short-acting opioid analgesics in addition to buprenorphine or methadone, for acute pain management; ensuring linkage to ongoing methadone or buprenorphine treatment; referring patients to psychosocial treatment; and ensuring access to naloxone for opioid overdose reversal. CONCLUSIONS: Included guidelines were informed by studies with various levels of rigor and quality. Future research should systematically study buprenorphine and methadone initiation and titration among people using fentanyl and people with pain, especially during hospitalization.

Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Initiation and Continuation: a Qualitative Study of Patients Who Received Addiction Consultation and Hospital-Based Providers.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations related to opioid use disorder (OUD) are rising. Addiction consultation services (ACS) increasingly provide OUD treatment to hospitalized patients, but barriers to initiating and continuing medications for OUD remain. We examined facilitators and barriers to hospital-based OUD treatment initiation and continuation from the perspective of patients and healthcare workers in the context of an ACS. METHODS: In this qualitative study, we sought input using key informant interviews and focus groups from patients who received care from an ACS during their hospitalization and from hospitalists, pharmacists, social workers, and nurses who work in the hospital setting. A multidisciplinary team coded and analyzed transcripts using a directed content analysis. FINDINGS: We conducted 20 key informant interviews with patients, nine of whom were interviewed following hospital discharge and 12 of whom were interviewed during a rehospitalization. We completed six focus groups and eight key informant interviews with hospitalists and hospital-based medical staff (n = 62). Emergent themes related to hospital-based OUD treatment included the following: the benefit of an ACS to facilitate OUD treatment engagement; expanded use of methadone or buprenorphine to treat opioid withdrawal; the triad of hospitalization, self-efficacy, and easily accessible, patient-centered treatment motivates change in opioid use; adequate pain control and stabilization of mental health conditions among patients with OUD contributed to opioid agonist therapy (OAT) continuation; and stable housing and social support are prerequisites for OAT uptake and continuation. CONCLUSION: Modifiable factors which facilitate hospital-based OUD treatment initiation and continuation include availability of in-hospital addiction expertise to offer easily accessible, patient-centered treatment and the use of methadone or buprenorphine to manage opioid withdrawal. Further research and public policy efforts are urgently needed to address reported barriers to hospital-based OUD treatment initiation and continuation which include unstable housing, poorly controlled chronic medical and mental illness, and lack of social support.

Experiences of stigma in hospitals with addiction consultation services: A qualitative analysis of patients' and hospital-based providers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Addiction consultation services (ACS) provide evidence-based treatment to hospitalized patients with substance use disorders (SUD). Expansion of hospital-based addiction care may help to counteract the stigma that patients with SUD experience within the health care system. Stigma is among the most impactful barriers to seeking care and adhering to medical advice among people with SUD. We aimed to understand how the presence of an ACS affected patients' and hospital-based providers' experiences with stigma in the hospital setting. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study utilizing focus groups and key informant interviews with hospital-based providers (hospitalists and hospital-based nurses, social workers, pharmacists). We also conducted key informant interviews with patients who received care from an ACS during their hospitalization. An interprofessional team coded and analyzed transcripts using a thematic analysis approach to identify emergent themes. RESULTS: Sixty-two hospital-based providers participated in six focus groups or eight interviews. Twenty patients participated in interviews. Four themes emerged relating to the experiences of stigma reported by hospital-based providers and hospitalized patients with SUD: (1) past experiences in the health care system propagate a cycle of stigmatization between hospital-based providers and patients; (2) documentation in medical charts unintentionally or intentionally perpetuates enacted stigma among hospital-based providers resulting in anticipated stigma among patients; (3) the presence of an ACS reduces enacted stigma among hospital-based providers through expanding the use of evidenced-based SUD treatment and reframing the SUD narrative; (4) ACS team members combat the effects of internalized stigma by promoting feelings of self-worth, self-efficacy, and mutual respect among patients with SUD. CONCLUSIONS: An ACS can facilitate destigmatization of hospitalized patients with SUD by incorporating evidence-based SUD treatment into routine hospital care, by providing and modeling compassionate care, and by reframing addiction as a chronic condition to be treated alongside other medical conditions. Future reductions of stigma in hospital settings may result from promoting greater use of evidence-based treatment for SUD and expanded education for health care providers on the use of non-stigmatizing language and medical terminology when documenting SUD in the medical chart.

The impact of access to addiction specialist on attitudes, beliefs and hospital-based opioid use disorder related care: A survey of hospitalist physicians.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalizations for complications related to opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasing. Hospitalists care for most hospitalized patients in the United States, yet little is known about their attitudes, beliefs, and clinical practices regarding OUD-related care.Methods: We distributed an online survey to hospitalists in the United States to measure how access to addiction specialists affected attitudes and beliefs regarding hospital-based OUD care, OUD screening practices, naloxone prescribing, and buprenorphine initiation.Results: Among 262 respondents, 67.9% (n = 178) reported having access to addiction specialists. While 84.5% (n = 221) reported often or always caring for patients with OUD, 48.2% (n = 126) rarely or never screened for OUD, 57.1% (n = 149) rarely or never prescribed or recommended naloxone as harm reduction, and 88.9% (n = 233) rarely or never initiated buprenorphine. In multivariable analyses, compared to hospitalists without access to addiction specialists, hospitalist with access to addiction specialists were more likely to feel supported to screen and refer patients to treatment (aOR = 4.4, 95% CI 2.1 - 9.1; ρ < 0.001), to be aware of local treatment resources (aOR = 3.4, 95% CI 1.8 - 6.3; ρ < 0.001), and refer patients to treatment (aOR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.7 - 5.6; ρ < 0.001).Conclusions: Many hospitalists do not provide life-saving treatment to patients with OUD. Access to addiction specialists may increase provision of OUD-related care by hospitalists.

Experiences with an addiction consultation service on care provided to hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder: a qualitative study of hospitalists, nurses, pharmacists, and social workers.

Background: In response to the opioid epidemic, addiction consultation services (ACS) increasingly provide dedicated hospital-based addiction treatment to patients with substance use disorder. We assessed hospitalist and medical staff perceptions of how the presence of 2 hospitals' ACS impacted care for hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). We inquired about ongoing challenges in caring for this patient population.Methods: We conducted a qualitative study of hospital-based providers utilizing focus groups and key informant interviews for data collection. Transcripts were analyzed using a mixed inductive-deductive approach. Emergent themes were identified through an iterative, multidisciplinary team-based process using a directed content analysis approach.Results: Hospitalists (n = 20), nurses (n = 13), social workers (n = 11), and pharmacists (n = 18) from a university hospital and a safety-net hospital in Colorado participated in focus groups or key informant interviews. In response to the availability of an ACS, hospitalists described increased confidence using methadone and buprenorphine to treat opioid withdrawal, which they perceived as contributing to improved patient outcomes and greater job satisfaction. Participants expressed concern about inconsistent care provided to patients with OUD that varied by the admitting team's specialty and the physician's background and training. Nurses and hospitalists reported frustrations with achieving adequate pain control among patients with OUD. Last, pharmacists reported practice variations when physicians dosed buprenorphine for acute pain among patients with OUD. A lack of standardized dosing led to concerns of inadequate analgesia or return to opioid use following hospital discharge.Conclusions: An ACS reportedly supports hospitalists and medical staff to best care for hospitalized patients with OUD. Notably, care provided to patients with OUD may not be uniform depending on various physician-level factors. Future work to address the concerns reported by study participants may include education for OUD treatment, early involvement of the ACS, and incorporation of buprenorphine prescribing algorithms to standardize care.

The Impact of a PDMP-EHR Data Integration Combined With Clinical Decision Support on Opioid and Benzodiazepine Prescribing Across Clinicians in a Metropolitan Area.

INTRODUCTION: Despite inconclusive evidence that prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMP) reduce opioid-related mortality, guidelines recommend PDMP review with opioid prescribing. Some reported barriers to use include time-consuming processes to obtain data and workflow disruptions. METHODS: We provided access to a PMDP-electronic health record (EHR) integrated program to 123 clinicians in one healthcare system. Remaining clinicians within the healthcare system and metropolitan area did not receive PDMP-EHR integration program access. We identified changes in opioid prescribing by linking prescription data available in the state PMDP database to individual clinicians. The primary outcome was change in receipt of high dose opioid prescriptions (>90 mg morphine equivalents) by Colorado residents before and after program integration. Secondary outcomes included changes in long-acting opioid receipt and overlapping opioid and benzodiazepine prescription days. Next, we surveyed clinicians to assess their perspectives on PDMP data acquisition before and after PDMP-EHR integration program access. RESULTS: High-dose opioid receipt decreased significantly across all 3 clinician groups [PDMP-EHR integration program access (27.6%, to 6.9%, P < 0.001); no program access in the same healthcare system (4.8% to 2.9%, P < 0.001), and no program access across the metropolitan area (13.5% to 6.1%, P < 0.001)]. Clinicians reported improved access to PDMP data using the PDMP-EHR integrated program compared to the state PDMP website (98.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Further study of PDMP-EHR integration programs on patient and clinician outcomes may illuminate the role of this technology in public health and in clinical practice.

The Development and Implementation of a Hospitalist-Directed Addiction Medicine Consultation Service to Address a Treatment Gap.

INTRODUCTION: Hospitalizations related to the consequences of substance use are rising yet most hospitalized patients with substance use disorder do not receive evidence-based addiction treatment. Opportunities to leverage the hospitalist workforce could close this treatment gap. AIM: To describe the development, implementation, and evaluation of a hospitalist-directed addiction consultation service (ACS) to provide in-hospital addiction treatment. SETTING: Six hundred fifty-bed university hospital in Aurora, Colorado. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Hospitalists completed buprenorphine waiver training, participated in a 13-part addiction lecture series, and completed a minimum of 40 hours of online addiction training. Hospitalists participated in shadow shifts with an addiction-trained physician. Dedicated addiction social workers developed relationships with local addiction treatment services. PROGRAM EVALUATION METRICS: Physician-related metrics included education, training, and clinical time spent in addiction practice. Patient and encounter-related metrics included a description of ACS care provision. RESULTS: Eleven hospitalists completed an average of 95 hours of addiction-related didactics. Once addiction training was complete, hospitalists spent an average of 30 days over 12 months staffing a weekday ACS. Between October 2019 and November 2020, the ACS completed 1620 consultations on 1350 unique patients. Alcohol was the most common substance (n = 1279; 79%), followed by tobacco (979; 60.4%), methamphetamines/amphetamines (n = 494; 30.5%), and opioids (n = 400; 24.7%). Naltrexone was the most frequently prescribed medication (n = 350; 21.6%), followed by acamprosate (n = 93; 5.7%), and buprenorphine (n = 77, 4.8%). Trauma was a frequent discharge diagnoses (n = 1564; 96.5%). Leaving prior to treatment completion was commonly noted (n = 120, 7.4%). The ACS completed 47 in-hospital methadone enrollments. DISCUSSION: The hospitalist-directed ACS is a promising clinical initiative that could be implemented to expand hospital-based addiction treatment. Future research is needed to understand challenges to disseminating this model into other hospital settings, and to evaluate intended and unintended effects of broad implementation.