Yoga and Physical Therapy for Chronic Pain and Opioid Use Disorder Onsite in an Opioid Treatment Program: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of integrated treatment for chronic pain and opioid use disorder (OUD). Yoga and physical therapy (PT) may improve pain and physical function of people living with (PLW) chronic low back pain (CLBP) and may also reduce opioid craving and use, but PLW with OUD face barriers to accessing these interventions. We hypothesize that compared to treatment as usual (TAU), providing yoga and PT onsite at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) will be effective at improving pain, opioid use, and quality of life among people with CLBP and OUD, and will be cost-effective. METHODS: In this hybrid type-1 effectiveness-implementation study, we will randomly assign 345 PLW CLBP and OUD from OTPs in the Bronx, NY, to 12 weeks of onsite yoga, onsite PT, or TAU. Primary outcomes are pain intensity, opioid use, and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes include physical function and overall well-being. DISCUSSION: This trial tests an innovative, patient-centered approach to combined management for pain and OUD in real-world settings. We rigorously examine the efficacy of yoga and PT onsite at OTPs as nonpharmacologic, cost-effective treatments among people with CLBP and OUD who face barriers to integrated care.

Payment-related barriers to medications for opioid use disorder: A critical review of the literature and real-world application.

BACKGROUND: The national opioid crisis continues to intensify, despite the fact that opioid use disorder (OUD) is treatable and opioid overdose deaths are preventable through first-line treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study identifies and categorizes payment-related barriers that impact MOUD access and retention from both the provider and patient perspectives and provides insight into how these barriers can be addressed. METHODS: We performed a critical review of the literature (peer-reviewed studies and relevant documents from the gray literature) to identify payment-related access and retention barriers to MOUD. We used the results of this review to develop an analytic framework to understand how payment impacts MOUD access and retention for both providers and patients. In addition, we reviewed action plans developed by Massachusetts communities that participated in the Healing Communities Study (HCS) to analyze which payment-related barriers were addressed through the study. RESULTS: We identified 18 payment-related barriers that patients or providers face when initiating or continuing MOUD with either methadone or buprenorphine in Opioid Treatment Programs (OTP) and non-OTP settings. Patient-related barriers mainly relate to health insurance coverage or the design of health plans (e.g., cost sharing, covered benefits) resulting in direct (medical and non-medical) and indirect costs that can affect both access and retention, especially as they relate to services provided in OTPs. Provider-related barriers include low reimbursement and administrative burden and are most likely to impact access to MOUD. Evidence-based strategies to expand MOUD as part of the HCS in Massachusetts targeted about half of the patient and provider payment-related barriers identified. CONCLUSION: Patients and providers face an array of payment-related barriers that impact access to and retention on MOUD, most of which relate to inadequate health insurance coverage, features of health plans, and key federal and state policies. As new regulatory policies are enacted that expand access to MOUD, such as greater flexibility in OTPs and MOUD delivered via telehealth, it will be important to align these delivery changes with payment reform involving payers, providers, and policymakers.

Critical incidents in Colorado's opioid treatment programs: A comparison of the COVID-19 pandemic to previous years.

INTRODUCTION: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) guidance allowed opioid treatment programs (OTPs) greater flexibility to provide take-home medication doses to patients. This study aims to characterize trends in the rates of critical incidents-safety events occurring in OTPs that are reportable to regulatory entities-across all Colorado OTPs during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of critical incidents (CIs) for patients enrolled in Colorado OTPs between the years 2017 to 2022, as recorded in Colorado Behavioral Health Administration's (BHA) Opioid Treatment Program Critical Incident Repository Dataset. March 15, 2020 was considered the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in Colorado, so only incidents which occurred from March 15-December 31 of each year were included. CI rate per 100 patients was calculated by dividing CI annual count between March 15-December 31 by the census of enrolled patients at the calendar midpoint of this period, which is August 7. Means comparison tests assessed differences in CI rates. RESULTS: OTP patient enrollment in Colorado increased from 4377 in 2017 to 7327 in 2022. Overall, Medication Diversion accounted for 70 % of CIs, followed by Death (14 %), and Other (5 %). There was a significant increase in the overall rate of CIs from 2017 to 2022 (1.1 % to 3.4 %). The average post-COVID CI rate was higher than pre-COVID (4.0 % vs. 2.4 %). There was no difference, however, in the post-COVID rate of CIs when exclusively compared to 2019 (4.0 % vs. 4.1 %). Post-pandemic years had significantly more CIs per month than pre-pandemic years (27.6 ± 5.6 vs 15.8 ± 3.5). There was no difference in mean monthly CIs between 2019 and post-pandemic (28.5 ± 5.3 vs 27.6 ± 5.6). CONCLUSIONS: There was no increase in the rate of reportable CIs in Colorado OTPs following the SAMHSA COVID-19 guidance increasing take-home doses when comparing 2019 to post-pandemic years. The notable increase in CI incidence occurred from 2018 to 2019, predating the pandemic. These data offer a measure of reassurance for the safety of increased take-home methadone doses. There should be further consideration of how a greater number of take-home doses might benefit both patients and OTPs.

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

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

Geographic variation in availability of opioid treatment programs across U.S. communities.

Methadone for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) treatment is only dispensed at Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs). Little is known about the geographic variation in OTP availability and community characteristics associated with the availability across smaller geographic communities in the U.S. To (1) describe geographic distribution of OTPs and (2) examine OTP availability by community characteristics in the contiguous U.S. at Zip Code Area Tabulation (ZCTA) level. Logistic regression was used to examine community characteristics associated with OTP availability (N = 30,367). Chi-square and t-tests were conducted to examine statistically significant differences in OTP availability. Maps and descriptive statistics were used to examine geographic variation in OTP availability. Only 5% (1,417) of ZCTAs had at least one OTP for a total of 1,682 OTPs. Rural ZCTAs had 50% lower odds of having an OTP compared to urban ZCTAs [AOR 0.5; (95% CI: 0.41-0.60)]. ZCTAs in the lowest income quartile had higher odds of having an OTP compared to ZCTAs in the highest income quartile [AOR 3.4; (95% CI: 2.71-4.18)]. Further, ZCTAs with OTPs had a higher proportion of minority residents [Black: 17.5% vs. 7.2%; Hispanic: 19.2% vs. 9%] and a lower proportion of White residents [55.1% vs. 78.2%]. Nationally, OTPs are extremely scarce with notable regional and urban-rural disparities. Potential solutions to address these disparities are discussed.

State guidance and system changes related to COVID-19: Impact on opioid treatment programs.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, methadone treatment may only be provided through opioid treatment programs (OTPs), which operate under a complex system of federal and state regulations. During the pandemic, federal regulators relaxed several longstanding restrictions for OTPs by permitting expanded eligibility for take-home medication and allowing counseling and medication management through telehealth. The purpose of this study was to assess the guidance provided by states regarding the revised guidelines and efforts to protect staff and patients in response to the pandemic. METHODS: Between September and October of 2020, The National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors (NASADAD) and Friends Research Institute, fielded a web-based qualitative survey of state opioid treatment authorities (SOTAs) across the United States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The study conducted the survey prior to the availability of the COVID vaccines. It queried 42 SOTAs concerning state guidance provided to OTPs on treatment operations and practices for existing patients and new admissions; actions to protect staff and patients; changes in treatment need and operational capacity; and administrative practices regarding treatment. This study examines the responses of 42 SOTAs (65 %) who completed the survey. RESULTS: Using content analysis, responses to the survey indicate that most states provided guidance to OTPs in response to the revised federal regulations and the need to protect staff and patients. All respondents reported that their states permitted increased number of take-homes doses for existing patients (100 %) and most reported doing so for new admissions (69 %; N=29). Ninety-eight percent (98 %; N=41) reported permitting remote counseling for existing patients and 90 % (N=38) permitting this for new admissions. SOTAs reported providing guidance on staff safety, operational procedures, oversight, and reforming billing practices to align with new models of service delivery. CONCLUSIONS: SOTAs generally reported that federal guidance increased patient access, engagement, and retention. Increased take-home flexibilities were viewed as important for expanding access and continuity of treatment, with the majority of SOTAs stating that the revised treatment practices (e.g., expansion of telehealth, flexible medication dispensing practices) were beneficial. These regulatory flexibilities, many believe, promoted the continuation of treatment and successful patient outcomes during the pandemic.

Opioid treatment program culture and philosophy: Views of OTP staff and state officials on implementing interim methadone treatment.

INTRODUCTION: People seeking treatment at opioid treatment programs (OTPs) can face admission delays. Interim methadone (IM) treatment, an effective approach to expedite admissions when programs lack sufficient counseling staff, has been seldom implemented. A study of implementation facilitation to spur the use of IM was conducted among six OTPs and their state opioid treatment authorities (SOTAs) in four US states. Between study recruitment and launch, organizational changes at three OTPs eliminated their need for IM. Two OTPs' requests to their states to provide IM (one prior to study launch and one following launch) were deferred by the states due to internal issues that required resolution to comply with federal IM regulations. During the study, another OTP's delays resolved, and one OTP streamlined its admissions procedures. METHODS: Virtual interviews were conducted with 16 OTP staff and SOTAs from six OTPs in four US states following their participation in the parent study. Interviews focused on the feasibility and acceptability of the implementation intervention for IM. We analyzed data using a constant comparative approach. RESULTS: Two overarching themes emerged from the qualitative data with respect to the role that organizational culture plays in OTP staff views of efforts to implement interim methadone: (1) the contrasting views of interim methadone based on whether staff adopt a traditional treatment vs. harm reduction philosophy and (2) the importance of reconciling these philosophies in addressing the culture shift that would accompany the process of implementing IM. CONCLUSIONS: Organizational treatment philosophy and program culture emerged as important factors determining the OTPs' staff's willingness to adopt new approaches to expedite admissions. Participants noted a tension between traditional treatment and harm reduction philosophies that impacted their views of IM, in part based on when they entered the drug treatment field. While understanding and addressing treatment philosophy and organizational culture and willingness to change is of importance when implementing new approaches in OTPs, leadership at the state and OTP level are powerful drivers of change.

Adoption of Electronic Health Record Among Substance Use Disorder Treatment Programs: Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health record (EHR) systems have been shown to be associated with improvements in care processes, quality of care, and patient outcomes. EHR also has a crucial role in the delivery of substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and is considered important for addressing SUD crises, including the opioid epidemic. However, little is known about the adoption of EHR in SUD treatment programs or the organizational-level factors associated with the adoption of EHR in SUD treatment. OBJECTIVE: We examined the adoption of EHR in SUD programs, with a focus on changes in adoption from 2014 to 2017, and identified organizational-level factors associated with EHR adoption. METHODS: We used data from the 2014 and 2017 National Drug Abuse Treatment System Surveys. Our analysis included 1027 SUD programs (531 in 2014 and 496 in 2017). We used chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests for categorical and continuous variables, respectively, to assess changes in EHR adoption, technology use, program, and client characteristics. We also investigated differences in characteristics and barriers to adoption by EHR adoption status (adopted EHR vs had not adopted or were planning to adopt EHR). We then conducted multivariate logistic regressions to examine internal and external factors associated with EHR adoption. RESULTS: The adoption of EHR increased significantly from 57.6% (306/531) in 2014 to 69.2% (343/496) in 2017 (P<.001), showing that nearly one-third (153/496, 30.8%) of SUD programs had not yet adopted an EHR system by 2017. We identified a significant increase in technology use and ownership by a parent company (P=.01 and P<.001) and a decrease in the percentage of uninsured patients in 2017 (P<.001), compared to 2014. Our analysis further showed significant differences by adoption status for three major barriers to adoption: (1) start-up costs, (2) ongoing financial costs, and (3) privacy or security concerns (P<.001). Programs that used computerized scheduling (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.02, 95% CI 2.23-4.09) and billing systems (AOR 2.29, 95% CI 1.62-3.25) were more likely to adopt EHR. Similarly, ownership type, such as private nonprofit (AOR 1.86, 95% CI 1.31-2.65) and public (AOR 2.14, 95% CI 1.27-3.67), or interest in participating in a patient-centered medical home (AOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.29-2.92), were associated with an increased likelihood to adopt EHR. Overall, SUD programs were more likely to adopt an EHR system in 2017 compared to 2014 (AOR 1.44, 95% CI 1.07-1.94). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlighted that SUD programs may be on track to achieve widespread EHR adoption. However, there is a need for focused strategies, resources, and policies explicitly designed to systematically address barriers and tackle obstacles to expanding the adoption of EHR systems. These efforts must be holistic and address factors at multiple organizational levels.

Retention and critical outcomes among new methadone maintenance patients following extended take-home reforms: a retrospective observational cohort study.

Background: Approximately 1800 opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in the US dispense methadone to upwards of 400,000 patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) annually, operating under longstanding highly restrictive guidelines. OTPs were granted novel flexibilities beginning March 15, 2020, allowing for reduced visit frequency and extended take-home doses to minimize COVID exposure with great variation across states and sites. We sought to use electronic health records to compare retention in treatment, opioid use, and adverse events among patients newly entering methadone maintenance in the post-reform period in comparison with year-ago, unexposed, controls. Methods: Retrospective observational cohort study across 9 OTPs, geographically dispersed, in the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Clinical Trials Network. Newly enrolled patients between April 15 and October 14, 2020 (post-COVID, reform period) v. March 15-September 14, 2019 (pre-COVID, control period) were assessed. The primary outcome was 6-month retention. Secondary outcomes were opioid use and adverse events including emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and overdose. Findings: 821 individuals were newly admitted in the post-COVID and year-ago control periods, average age of 38.3 (SD 11.1), 58.9% male. The only difference across pre- and post-reform groups was the prevalence of psychostimulant use disorder (25.7% vs 32.9%, p = 0.02). Retention was non-inferior (60.0% vs 60.1%) as were hazards of adverse events in the aggregate (X2 (1) = 0.55, p = 0.46) in the post-COVID period. However, rates of month-level opioid use were higher among post-COVID intakes compared to pre-COVID controls (64.8% vs 51.1%, p < 0.001). Moderator analyses accounting for stimulant use and site-level variation in take-home schedules did not change findings. Interpretation: Policies allowing for extended take-home schedules were not associated with worse retention or adverse events despite slightly elevated rates of measured opioid use while in care. Relaxed guidelines were not associated with measurable increased harms and findings could inform future studies with prospective trials. Funding: USDHHSNIDACTNUG1DA013035-15.

Impact of COVID-19-related methadone regulatory flexibilities: views of state opioid treatment authorities and program staff.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal regulations in the USA for methadone treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) were temporarily revised to reduce clinic crowding and promote access to treatment. METHODS: As part of a study seeking to implement interim methadone without routine counseling to hasten treatment access in Opioid Treatment Programs with admission delays, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted via Zoom with participating staff (N = 11) in six OTPs and their State Opioid Treatment Authorities (SOTAs; N = 5) responsible for overseeing the OTPs' federal regulatory compliance. Participants discussed their views on the response of OTPs in their states to the pandemic and the impact of the COVID-related regulatory flexibilities on staff, established patients, and new program applicants. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and a content analysis was conducted using ATLAS.ti. RESULTS: All SOTAs requested the blanket take-home exemption and supported the use of telehealth for counseling. Participants noted that these changes were more beneficial for established patients than program applicants. Established patients were able to obtain a greater number of take-homes and attend individual counseling remotely. Patients with limited resources had greater difficulty or were unable to access remote counseling. The convenience of intake through telehealth did not extend to new program applicants because the admission physical exam requirement was not waived. CONCLUSIONS: The experienced reflections of SOTAs and OTP providers on methadone practice changes during the COVID-19 pandemic offer insights on SAMHSA's proposed revisions to its OTP regulations. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov # NCT04188977.

Scaling and Sustaining Facilitated Telemedicine to Expand Treatment Access Among Underserved Populations: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Opioid treatment programs are an essential component of the management of opioid use disorder (OUD). They have also been proposed as "medical homes" to expand health care access for underserved populations. We utilized telemedicine as a method to increase access for hepatitis C virus (HCV) care among people with OUD. Methods: We interviewed 30 staff and 15 administrators regarding the integration of facilitated telemedicine for HCV into opioid treatment programs. Participants provided feedback and insight for sustaining and scaling facilitated telemedicine for people with OUD. We utilized hermeneutic phenomenology to develop themes related to telemedicine sustainability in opioid treatment programs. Results: Three themes emerged on sustaining the facilitated telemedicine model: (1) Telemedicine as a Technical Innovation in Opioid Treatment Programs, (2) Technology Transcending Space and Time, and (3) COVID-19 Disrupting the Status Quo. Participants identified skilled staff, ongoing training, technology infrastructure and support, and an effective marketing campaign as key to maintaining the facilitated telemedicine model. Participants highlighted the study-supported case manager's role in managing the technology to transcend temporal and geographical challenges for HCV treatment access for people with OUD. COVID-19 fueled changes in health care delivery, including facilitated telemedicine, to expand the opioid treatment program's mission as a medical home for people with OUD. Conclusions: Opioid treatment programs can sustain facilitated telemedicine to increase health care access for underserved populations. COVID-19-induced disruptions promoted innovation and policy changes recognizing telemedicine's role in expanding health care access to underserved populations. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02933970.

Acceptability, feasibility, and outcomes of a clinical pilot program for video observation of methadone take-home dosing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Methadone is one of the most utilized treatments for opioid use disorder. However, requirements for observing methadone dosing can impose barriers to patients and increase risk for respiratory illness transmission (e.g., COVID-19). Video observation of methadone dosing at home could allow opioid treatment programs (OTPs) to offer more take-home doses while ensuring patient safety through remote observation of ingestion. METHODS: Between April and August 2020, a clinical pilot program of video observation of methadone take-home dosing via smartphone was conducted within a multisite OTP agency. Participating patients completed a COVID-19 symptom screener and submitted video recordings of themselves ingesting all methadone take-home doses. Patients who followed these procedures for a two-week trial period could continue participating in the full pilot program and potentially receive more take-home doses. This retrospective observational study characterizes patient engagement and compares clinical outcomes with matched controls. RESULTS: Of 44 patients who initiated the two-week trial, 33 (75 %) were successful and continued participating in the full pilot program. Twenty full pilot participants (61 %) received increased take-home doses. Full pilot participants had more days with observed dosing over a 60-day period than matched controls (mean = 53.2 vs. 16.6 days, respectively). Clinical outcomes were similar between pilot participants and matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: Video observation of methadone take-home dosing implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic was feasible. This model has the potential to enhance safety by increasing rates of observed methadone dosing and reducing infection risks and barriers associated with relying solely on face-to-face observation of methadone dosing.

The measurement-based care to opioid treatment programs project (MBC2OTP): a study protocol using rapid assessment procedure informed clinical ethnography.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial interventions are needed to enhance patient engagement and retention in medication treatment within opioid treatment programs. Measurement-based care (MBC), an evidence-based intervention structure that involves ongoing monitoring of treatment progress over time to assess the need for treatment modifications, has been recommended as a flexible and low-cost intervention for opioid treatment program use. The MBC2OTP Project is a two-phase pilot hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial that has three specific aims: (1) to employ Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) to collect mixed methods data to inform MBC implementation; (2) to use RAPICE data to adapt an MBC protocol; and (3) to conduct a hybrid type 1 trial to evaluate MBC's preliminary effectiveness and implementation potential in opioid treatment programs. METHODS: This study will be conducted in two phases. Phase 1 will include RAPICE site visits, qualitative interviews (N = 32-48 total), and quantitative surveys (N = 64-80 total) with staff at eight programs to build community partnerships and evaluate contextual factors impacting MBC implementation. Mixed methods data will be analyzed using immersion/crystallization and thematic analysis to inform MBC adaptation and site selection. Four programs selected for Phase 2 will participate in MBC electronic medical record integration, training, and ongoing support. Chart reviews will be completed in the 6 months prior-to and following MBC integration (N = 160 charts, 80 pre and post) to evaluate effectiveness (patient opioid abstinence and treatment engagement) and implementation outcomes (counselor MBC exposure and fidelity). DISCUSSION: This study is among the first to take forward recommendations to implement and evaluate MBC in opioid treatment programs. It will also employ an innovative RAPICE approach to enhance the quality and rigor of data collection and inform the development of an MBC protocol best matched to opioid treatment programs. Overall, this work seeks to enhance treatment provision and clinical outcomes for patients with opioid use disorder. Trial registration This study will be registered with Clinicaltrials.gov within 21 days of first participant enrollment in Phase 2. Study Phase 1 (RAPICE) does not qualify as a clinical trial, therefore Phase 2 clinical trial registration has not yet been pursued because all elements of Phase 2 will be dependent on Phase 1 outcomes.

Association Between Interorganizational Collaboration in Opioid Response and Treatment Capacity for Opioid Use Disorder in Counties of Five States: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: Local governments on the front lines of the opioid epidemic often collaborate across organizations to achieve a more comprehensive opioid response. Collaboration is especially important in rural communities, which can lack capacity for addressing health crises, yet little is known about how local collaboration in opioid response relates to key outputs like treatment capacity. Purpose: This cross-sectional study examined the association between local governments' interorganizational collaboration activity and agonist treatment capacity for opioid use disorder (OUD), and whether this association was stronger for rural than for metropolitan communities. Methods: Data on the location of facilities providing buprenorphine and methadone were merged with a 2019 survey of all 358 counties in 5 states (CO, NC, OH, PA, and WA) that inquired about their collaboration activity for opioid response. Regression analysis was used to estimate the effect of a collaboration activity index and its constituent items on the capacity to provide buprenorphine or methadone in a county and whether this differed by urbanicity. Results: A response rate of 47.8% yielded an analytic sample of n = 171 counties, including 77 metropolitan, 50 micropolitan, and 44 rural counties. Controlling for covariates, a 1-unit increase in the collaboration activity index was associated with 0.155 (95% CI = 0.005, 0.304) more methadone facilities, ie, opioid treatment programs (OTPs), per 100 000 population. An interaction model indicated this association was stronger for rural (average marginal effect = 0.354, 95% CI = 0.110, 0.599) than for non-rural counties. Separate models revealed intergovernmental data and information sharing, formal agreements, and organizational reforms were driving the above associations. Collaboration activity did not vary with the capacity to provide buprenorphine at non-OTP facilities. Spatial models used to account for spatial dependence occurring with OUD treatment capacity showed similar results. Conclusion: Rural communities may be able to leverage collaborations in opioid response to expand treatment capacity through OTPs.

Geographic disparities in access to Medication for Opioid Use Disorder across US census tracts based on treatment utilization behavior.

Drug overdose is the leading cause of accidental death in the U.S. with deaths from opioid overdose occurring at a higher rate in rural areas. The gaps in the provision of healthcare services have been exacerbated by the opioid crisis leaving vulnerable populations without access to preventative care and education, harm reduction, both chronic and acute treatment of the symptoms of opioid use disorder (OUD), and long-term psychological support for those with OUD and their families. There has been a call in the literature -and a federal mandate-for increased access to opioid treatment facilities, but to date this access has not been operationalized using best practices in geography. Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) with FDA-approved methadone or buprenorphine has been shown to increase treatment retention, reduce opioid use and associated health and societal harms, and reduce opioid related overdose, and as such is considered the most effective treatment for OUD. The objective of this study is to examine U.S. adults' spatial access to MOUD - specifically locations of certified Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) and DATA-waived Buprenorphine providers. A gravity-based variant of the enhanced two-step floating catchment area model is employed, where friction of distance is based on previously published willingness to travel distances for patients visiting OTPs, to assess how opioid agonist treatment accessibility varies across the nation. Findings suggest that there are extensive 'treatment deserts' where there is little to no physical access to MOUD, especially in rural areas. The significance of this work lies in the incorporation of treatment utilization behavior in the access metric, and the continued confirmation of gaps in access to OUD services despite federal efforts to improve accessibility.

Accuracy of publicly-listed locator information for buprenorphine waivered practitioners and opioid treatment programs in the US, 2020.

Background: Opioid use disorder affects millions of Americans, but only a fraction receive treatment. This may be due in part to inaccurate information available about buprenorphine waivered practitioners (waivered practitioners) and Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) on public, federally-sponsored locator databases. We aimed to assess the accuracy of publicly-listed locator information for waivered practitioners and OTPs across the US. Methods: Using a cross-sectional study design, we randomly sampled waivered practitioners (n = 253; 0.5%) and licensed OTPs (n = 165; 10%) that were publicly-listed on a federally-sponsored database. We used a three-pronged approach to assess the accuracy of the information available by concurrently administering a phone survey (making up to 3 attempts to contact), conducting online searches, and reviewing provider information on state board websites (practitioners only) between August and November 2020. We used descriptive analyses and inferential statitistics to analyze the data. Results: Among n = 418 waivered practitioners and OTPs sampled, many were located in the South and in an urban area. For the phone survey, researchers were able to reach OTPs nearly twice as often as waivered practitioners. Of those reached, n = 19 waivered practitioners and n = 40 OTPs agreed to participate, and we found most had up-to-date contact information. OTPs yielded significantly more online search results and matching contact information than waivered practitioners (p < 0.001). Most waivered practitioners were located on state licensing board websites, but few had contact information listed, and only one listed the practitioner's waiver status. Conclusions: Waivered practitioners and OTPs were difficult to reach via phone but easier to find online and on state licensing board websites; when they were reached via phone, their contact information was very accurate. Whether challenges locating a waivered practitioner or OTP is associated with lower treatment utilization should be evaluated.

State-level regulations and opioid-related health outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Due to the ongoing opioid use disorder crisis, improved access to opioid treatment programs (OTPs) is needed. However, OTPs operate in a complex regulatory environment which may limit their ability to positively affect health outcomes. The objective of this study was to examine how the number and type of state OTP regulations are associated with opioid-related deaths, hospitalizations, and emergency department visits. METHODS: Cross-sectional data capturing information about OTP state-level regulations collected by Jackson et al. was combined with other secondary sources. OTP regulations were categorized based on the nature of their focus. Analyses include bivariate and multivariable regressions that controlled for region and other state laws that can affect opioid outcomes. RESULTS: In bivariate analysis, a greater number of OTP regulations was positively correlated with both deaths and emergency visits. Moreover, a greater number of regulations in the Physical Facilities Management category (e.g., rules related to restrooms, lighting, and signage) was positively correlated with both deaths and hospitalizations. The number of regulations in the Staffing Requirement category was positively associated with emergency visits. In adjusted analysis, the number of regulations in the Physical Facilities Management category was positively associated with opioid-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: States with a higher number of regulations had poorer opioid-related outcomes. Additional research is needed to support policy decisions that can improve access to OTPs and reduce avoidable deaths, hospitalizations, and emergency visits.

Initiation of medication for opioid use disorder across a health system: A retrospective analysis of patient characteristics and inpatient outcomes.

Objectives: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has gained significant momentum as an evidence-based intervention for treating opioid use disorder (OUD). The purpose of this study was to characterize MOUD initiations for buprenorphine and extended release (ER) naltrexone across all care sites at a major health system in the Midwest and determine whether MOUD initiation was associated with inpatient outcomes. Methods: The study population comprised patients with OUD in the health system between 2018 and 2021. First, we described characteristics of all MOUD initiations for the study population within the health system. Second, we compared inpatient length of stay (LOS) and unplanned readmission rates between patients prescribed MOUD and patients not prescribed MOUD, including a pre-post comparison of patients prescribed MOUD before versus after initiation. Results: The 3,831 patients receiving MOUD were mostly white, non-Hispanic and generally received buprenorphine over ER naltrexone. 65.5% of most recent initiations occurred in an inpatient setting. Compared to those not prescribed MOUD, inpatient encounters where patients received MOUD on or before the admission date were significantly less likely to be unplanned readmissions (13% vs. 20%, p < 0.001) and their LOS was 0.14 days shorter (p = 0.278). Among patients prescribed MOUD, there was a significant reduction in the readmission rate after initiation compared to before (13% vs. 22%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This study is the first to examine MOUD initiations for thousands of patients across multiple care sites in a health system, finding that receiving MOUD is associated with clinically meaningful reductions in readmission rates.

COVID-19-related policy changes for methadone take-home dosing: A multistate survey of opioid treatment program leadership.

Background: In the United States, methadone for treatment of opioid use disorder is dispensed via highly-regulated accredited opioid treatment programs (OTP). During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal regulations were loosened, allowing for greater use of take-home methadone doses. We sought to understand how OTP leaders responded to these policy changes. Methods: We distributed a multistate electronic survey from September to November 2020 of OTP leadership to members of the American Association for the Treatment of Opioid Dependence (AATOD) who self-identified as leaders of OTPs. We asked study participants about how their OTP(s) implemented COVID-19-related policy changes into their clinical practice focusing on provision of take-home methadone doses, factors used to determine patient stability, and potential concerns about increased take-home doses. We used Chi-square test to compare survey responses between characterizations of the OTPs. Results: Of 170 survey respondents (17% response rate), the majority represented leadership of for-profit OTPs (69%) and were in a Southern state (54%). Routine allowances and practices related to take-home methadone doses varied across OTPs during the COVID-19 pandemic: 80 (47%) reported 14 days for newly enrolled patients (within past 90 days), 89 (52%) reported 14 days for "less stable" patients, and 112 (66%) reported 28 days for "stable" patients. Conclusions: We found that not all eligible OTP leaders adopted the practice of routinely allowing newly enrolled, "less stable," and "stable" patients on methadone to have increased take-home doses up to the limit allowed by federal regulations during COVID-19. The pandemic provides an opportunity to critically re-evaluate long-established methadone and OTP regulations in preparation for future emergencies.