Weaning buprenorphine in pregnant patients.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes after buprenorphine wean compared to patients maintained on buprenorphine throughout pregnancy. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of pregnant patients with opioid use disorder enrolled in a multidisciplinary treatment program between 2015 and 2022. All patients were offered Medications to treat Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) primarily with buprenorphine. Patients had at least 2 prenatal visits and negative urine drug tests (UDT) prior to weaning. The experimental group underwent a buprenorphine wean greater than 20% of their baseline dose. The control group was maintained on buprenorphine throughout the pregnancy. Relapse was defined as patient reported use or positive UDT during weekly assessments. Mass spectrophotometer was used for detection of drugs in samples. Fisher's exact tests were used to compare outcomes in weaned and control groups. RESULTS: 334 of 456 (73%) patients were treated with buprenorphine during pregnancy, with 39 in the experimental group and 295 in the control group. The mean dose for buprenorphine was similar between the groups (wean: 10.6 mg ± 5.6 vs. control: 10.3 mg ± 4.6, p = 0.76) but was significantly lower at delivery (wean: 4.4 ± 4.6 mg vs. control: 13.0 ± 4.7, p < 0.0001). Mean gestational age at initiation of the buprenorphine wean was 22.7 weeks. 10 of 39 (26%) who weaned were able to completely discontinue buprenorphine prior to delivery. Demographic data was similar between the groups, including overdose history. Overdose history at time of enrollment had a higher trend in the non-weaning group. neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS) treatment was significantly lower in the wean group (23 vs. 47%, p = 0.006), as was highest Finnegan score (9.6 ± 4.5 vs. 12.3 ± 4.0, p = 0.0003). Birthweight percentile was significantly higher in the wean group (44.3 ± 29.9 vs. 34.8 ± 24.4, p = 0.03). Gestational age at delivery, mode of delivery, and complications (HTN, DM, preterm labor, or short cervix) at delivery did not significantly differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: Despite counseling to stay on buprenorphine, there are patients who desire to wean. The NOWS rate in the weaned cohort was significantly lower than the controls with no observed increase in maternal or neonatal morbidity. There were no maternal overdoses or deaths during the pregnancy. Larger studies are needed to evaluate this approach.

Healthcare staff's perspectives on long-acting injectable buprenorphine treatment: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB) formulations are a novel treatment approach in opioid agonist treatment (OAT), which provide patients with a steady dose administered weekly or monthly and thus reduce the need for frequent clinic visits. Several studies have analyzed patient experiences of LAIB but the perspective of OAT staff is unknown. This study aimed to explore how healthcare staff working in OAT clinics in Sweden perceive and manage treatment with LAIB. METHODS: Individual qualitative interviews were conducted with OAT physicians (n = 10) in tandem with nine focus group sessions with OAT nurses and other staff categories (n = 41). The data was analyzed with thematic text analysis. RESULTS: Five central themes were identified in the data: (1) advantages and disadvantages of LAIB, (2) patient categories that may or may not need LAIB, (3) patients' degrees of medication choice, (4) keeping tabs, control and treatment alliance, and (5) LAIB's impact on risk and enabling environments in OAT. Overall staff found more advantages than disadvantages with LAIB and considered that patients with ongoing substance use and low adherence were most likely to benefit from LAIB. However, less frequent visits were viewed as problematic in terms of developing a treatment alliance and being able to keep tabs on patients' clinical status. Clinics differed regarding patients' degrees of choice in medication, which varied from limited to extensive. LAIB affected both risk and enabling environments in OAT. CONCLUSIONS: LAIB may strengthen the enabling environment in OAT for some patients by reducing clinic visits, exposure to risk environments, and the pressure to divert medication. A continued discussion about the prerequisites and rationale for LAIB implementation is needed in policy and practice.

Patients' perspectives on buprenorphine subcutaneous implant: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Considering the enormous burden represented by the opioid use disorder (OUD), it is important to always consider, when implementing opioid agonist therapy (OAT), the potential impact on patient's adherence, quality of life, and detoxification. Thus, the purpose of the study is to evaluate how the introduction of a novel OAT approach influences these key factors in the management of OUD. CASE PRESENTATION: This article marks the pioneering use of OAT through buprenorphine implant in Europe and delves into the experience of six patients diagnosed with OUD at a relatively young age. The patients, comprising both males and a female, are of Caucasian Italian and African Italian ancestry (case 4) and exhibit an age range from 23 to 63, with an average drug abuse history of 19 ± 12 years. All patients were on stable traditional OAT before transitioning to buprenorphine implants. Despite the heterogeneity in social and educational backgrounds, health status, and drug abuse initiation histories, the case series reveals consistent positive treatment outcomes such as detoxification, absence of withdrawal symptoms and of side effects. Notably, all patients reported experiencing a newfound sense of freedom and improved quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: These results emphasise the promising impact of OAT via buprenorphine implants in enhancing the well-being and quality of life in the context of OUD.

Primary Care Providers' Experiences Treating Opioid Use Disorder Using Telehealth in the Height of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed a rapid shift in healthcare delivery towards telehealth services, impacting patient care, including opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. Regulatory changes eliminated the in-person evaluation requirement for buprenorphine treatment, encouraging adoption of telehealth. This study focused on understanding experiences of primary care providers in predominantly rural areas who used telehealth for OUD treatment during the pandemic. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 primary care providers. Participants practiced in 13 rural and 9 urban counties in Kentucky and Arkansas. Data were analyzed using conventional content analysis. RESULTS: The pandemic significantly impacted healthcare delivery. While telehealth was integrated for behavioral health counseling, in-person visits remained crucial, especially for urine drug screenings. Telehealth experiences varied, with some facing technology issues, while others found it efficient. Telehealth proved valuable for behavioral health counseling and sustaining relationships with established patients. Patients with OUD faced unique challenges, including housing, internet, transportation, and counseling needs. Stigma surrounding OUD affected clinical relationships. Building strong patient-provider relationships emerged as a central theme, emphasizing the value of face-to-face interactions. Regarding buprenorphine training, most found waiver training helpful but lacked formal education. CONCLUSION: This research offers vital guidance for improving OUD treatment services, especially in rural areas during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic. It highlights telehealth's value as a tool while acknowledging its limitations. The study underscores the significance of strong patient-provider relationships, the importance of reducing stigma, and the potential for training programs to elevate quality of care in OUD treatment.

Perioperative pain optimization in the age of the opioid epidemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The opioid epidemic remains a constant and increasing threat to our society with overdoses and overdose deaths rising significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Growing evidence suggests a link between perioperative opioid use, postoperative opioid prescribing, and the development of opioid use disorder (OUD). As a result, strategies to better optimize pain management during the perioperative period are urgently needed. The purpose of this review is to summarize the most recent multimodal analgesia (MMA) recommendations, summarize evidence for efficacy surrounding the increased utilization of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, and discuss the implications for rising use of buprenorphine for OUD patients who present for surgery. In addition, this review will explore opportunities to expand our treatment of complex patients via transitional pain services. RECENT FINDINGS: There is ample evidence to support the benefits of MMA. However, optimal drug combinations remain understudied, presenting a target area for future research. ERAS protocols provide a more systematic and targeted approach for implementing MMA. ERAS protocols also allow for a more comprehensive approach to perioperative pain management by necessitating the involvement of surgical specialists. Increasingly, OUD patients taking buprenorphine are presenting for surgery. Recent guidance from a multisociety OUD working group recommends that buprenorphine not be routinely discontinued or tapered perioperatively. Lastly, there is emerging evidence to justify the use of transitional pain services for more comprehensive treatment of complex patients, like those with chronic pain, preoperative opioid tolerance, or substance use disorder. SUMMARY: Perioperative physicians must be aware of the impact of the opioid epidemic and explore methods like MMA techniques, ERAS protocols, and transitional pain services to improve the perioperative pain experience and decrease the risks of opioid-related harm.

Withdrawal during outpatient low dose buprenorphine initiation in people who use fentanyl: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD); however, buprenorphine initiation can be complicated by withdrawal symptoms including precipitated withdrawal. There has been increasing interest in using low dose initiation (LDI) strategies to reduce this withdrawal risk. As there are limited data on withdrawal symptoms during LDI, we characterize withdrawal symptoms in people with daily fentanyl use who underwent initiation using these strategies as outpatients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with OUD using daily fentanyl who were prescribed 7-day or 4-day LDI at 2 substance use disorder treatment clinics in San Francisco. Two addiction medicine experts assessed extracted chart documentation for withdrawal severity and precipitated withdrawal, defined as acute worsening of withdrawal symptoms immediately after taking buprenorphine. A third expert adjudicated disagreements. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: There were 175 initiations in 126 patients. The mean age was 37 (SD 10 years). 71% were men, 26% women, and 2% non-binary. 21% identified as Black, 16% Latine, and 52% white. 60% were unstably housed and 75% had Medicaid insurance. Substance co-use included 74% who used amphetamines, 29% cocaine, 22% benzodiazepines, and 19% alcohol. Follow up was available for 118 (67%) initiations. There was deviation from protocol instructions in 22% of these initiations with follow up. 31% had any withdrawal, including 21% with mild symptoms, 8% moderate and 2% severe. Precipitated withdrawal occurred in 10 cases, or 8% of initiations with follow up. Of these, 7 had deviation from protocol instructions; thus, there were 3 cases with follow up (3%) in which precipitated withdrawal occurred without protocol deviation. CONCLUSIONS: Withdrawal was relatively common in our cohort but was mostly mild, and precipitated withdrawal was rare. Deviation from instructions, structural barriers, and varying fentanyl use characteristics may contribute to withdrawal. Clinicians should counsel patients who use fentanyl that mild withdrawal symptoms are likely during LDI, and there is still a low risk for precipitated withdrawal. Future studies should compare withdrawal across initiation types, seek ways to support patients in initiating buprenorphine, and qualitatively elicit patients' withdrawal experiences.

Mediating effect of craving on the impact of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone treatment on opioid use: Results from a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between opioid craving and opioid use is unclear. We sought to determine to what extent craving mediated the relationship between opioid agonist therapy and changes in opioid use. METHODS: Data came from a pragmatic, 24-week, pan-Canadian, multi-centric, open-label, randomized controlled trial comparing flexible buprenorphine/naloxone take-home doses to standard supervised methadone models of care for the treatment of prescription-type opioid use disorder. Participants were randomly allocated to buprenorphine/naloxone or methadone models of care. 270 people with prescription-type opioid use disorder were included in analyses. There were 93 women (34.4%) and 2 transgender (0.7%) participants. Most participants were white (67.4%), 45.9% reported unstable living conditions, and 44.8% had psychiatric comorbidities. Generalized linear mixed models followed by mediation analysis estimated the direct effect of treatment group on Timeline Followback-reported next-week opioid use and the indirect effect through past 24-hour opioid craving measured using the Brief Substance Craving Scale at week 2, 6, 10, 14, 18 and 22. RESULTS: Upon mediation analysis, the average direct effect of treatment on opioid use was 0.465 (95 % CI = 0.183 to 0.751, p < 0.001). The average causal mediated effect was 0.144 (95 % CI = 0.021 to 0.110; p < 0.001). Craving accounted for 23.6 % of the effect of treatment on opioid use (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Past 24-hour craving was associated with increased next-week opioid use; however, craving only partially mediated the effect of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone on next-week opioid use. Research is needed to develop a comprehensive understanding of factors mediating opioid use during opioid agonist therapy.

Barriers and facilitators for family physicians prescribing opioid agonist therapy in Saskatchewan.

OBJECTIVE: To explore barriers and facilitators for family physicians in Saskatchewan prescribing opioid agonist therapy (OAT). DESIGN: Self-administered postal survey. SETTING: Family medicine practices in Saskatchewan. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 218 Saskatchewan family physicians who were not authorized to prescribe OAT as of June 2022. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive and inferential statistics of physicians' self-reported barriers to and facilitators of prescribing OAT for opioid use disorder (OUD). RESULTS: Most respondents (84.8%) had some comfort with diagnosing OUD. However, more than half (58.3%) did not feel confident or knowledgeable about prescribing OAT. Barriers to OAT prescribing included lack of time, incomplete training requirements, lack of interest, insufficient funding or support, feeling overwhelmed, and perceiving that OAT does not work and thus is not necessary. Physicians working in core neighbourhoods and those receiving fee-for-service compensation reported the least available time to prescribe OAT. Conversely, physicians working in interdisciplinary team settings had increased time for OAT prescribing compared with physicians in other settings. Having a close personal relationship with someone with OUD was correlated with increased comfort in diagnosing OUD as well as with knowledge about and confidence in prescribing OAT. Themes identified as facilitators to increasing OAT prescribing included the addition of resources and supports, increased training, more awareness about OUD and OAT, enhanced compensation, and altered prescribing regulations. CONCLUSION: Despite the presence of several real and perceived barriers limiting OAT prescribing by Saskatchewan family physicians, there are family physicians interested in providing this therapy. Increased clinical resources and support, including increased interdisciplinary practice, are actionable steps that should be considered by policy decision makers to address this issue. Additionally, increased OUD and OAT education, which includes the perspectives of those with lived experience of OUD, would help address physician confidence, knowledge, and awareness in this area.

Long-acting injectable depot buprenorphine from a harm reduction perspective in patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable depot buprenorphine may increase access to opioid agonist treatment (OAT) for patients with opioid use disorder in different treatment phases. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of depot buprenorphine among Swedish patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities. METHOD: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with OAT patients with experience of depot buprenorphine. Recruitment took place at two OAT clinics with a harm reduction focus, specializing in the treatment of patients with ongoing substance use and multiple comorbidities. Nineteen participants were included, 12 men and seven women, with a mean age of 41 years (range 24-56 years), and a mean of 21 years (5-35 years) of experience with illicit substance use. All participants had ongoing substance use and psychiatric comorbidities such as ADHD, anxiety, mood, psychotic and eating disorders. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was conducted both manually and using qualitative data analysis software. RESULTS: Participants reported social benefits and positive changes in self-perception and identity. In particular, depot buprenorphine contributed to a realization that it was possible to make life changes and engage in activities not related to substance use. Another positive aspect that emerged from the interviews was a noticeable relief from perceived pressure to divert OAT medication, while some expressed the lack of income from diverted oral/sublingual OAT medication as a negative, but still acceptable, consequence of the depot buprenorphine. Many participants considered that the information provided prior to starting depot buprenorphine was insufficient. Also, not all patients found depot buprenorphine suitable, and those who experienced coercion exhibited particularly negative attitudes towards the medication. CONCLUSIONS: OAT patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities reported clear benefits of depot buprenorphine, including changes in self-perception which has been theorized to play an important role in recovery. Clinicians should consider the specific information needs of this population and the extensive diversion of traditional OAT medications in this population to improve the treatment experience and outcomes. Overall, depot buprenorphine is a valuable treatment option for a population in need of harm reduction and may also contribute to psychological changes that may facilitate recovery in those with the greatest need.

Network Analysis of Medical Claims Data Suggests Network-Based, Regional Targeting and Intervention Delivery Strategies to Increase Access to Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD).

Opioid overdose and Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) statistics underscore an urgent need to significantly expand access to evidence-based OUD treatment. Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) has proven effective for treating OUD. However, limited access to these treatments persists. Recognizing the need for significant investment in clinical, behavioral, and translational research, the Indiana State Department of Health and Indiana University embarked on a research initiative supported by the "Responding to the Addictions Crisis" Grand Challenge Program. This brief presents recommendations based on existing research and our own analyses of medical claims data in Indiana, where opioid misuse is high and treatment access is limited. The recommendations cover target providers, intervention focus, priority regions, and delivery methods.

Monitoring buprenorphine in patients on medication-assisted treatment.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is used for medication-assisted treatment of opioid dependence. PURPOSE: Monitoring of medication adherence involves testing of urine or oral fluid for the drug or its metabolite. METHODS: Quantitative results using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometer testing defined the excretion pattern of the drug and its metabolites. RESULTS: Frequency distribution curves of buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine describe the expected drug concentrations of patients on this medication. CONCLUSION: Urine and oral fluid drug testing can be used to monitor adherence in this population.

Chronic opioid pain treatment converted to buprenorphine: A case series using a 3-step low-dose incremental dosing guideline.

We report a 30-case series from the Pain Management Center at the Massachusetts General Hospital where we have applied a guideline to convert chronic treatment for pain from full agonist opioids (FAO) to buprenorphine (BUP). Of the patients, 24 (80 percent) elected to continue BUP over FAO. Five conversions were stopped for side effects (fatigue) and/or lack of sufficient pain reduction. One patient elected not to participate on the day that the conversion was to begin. There were no major adverse events. We conclude that conversion to BUP should be considered as an alternative to treat patients on chronic opioids for pain.

Tianeptine as an opiate replacement in a patient on methadone treatment: A case report.

Tianeptine, an antidepressant and full µ-opioid receptor agonist, has increased in popularity and has been used as an over-the-counter supplement over the past decade. Due to its well-documented euphoric effects, there exists elevated risk for potential abuse. Buprenorphine-naloxone has been successfully utilized to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) in patients concurrently using tianeptine, limiting withdrawal symptoms and abstinence. However, there is limited evidence on the management of tianeptine use disorder, specifically methadone or naltrexone. The current opioid epidemic, the emerging use of tianeptine, and the lack of physician awareness have emphasized the need for further research on the role of tianeptine in medication-assisted treatment for OUD. This case report aims to demonstrate how medication-assisted therapy can be successfully utilized in a patient with opioid and severe other (tianeptine) drug use disorder.

Treatment setting and buprenorphine discontinuation: an analysis of multi-state insurance claims.

BACKGROUND: Potential differences in buprenorphine treatment outcomes across various treatment settings are poorly characterized in multi-state administrative data. We thus evaluated the association of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment setting and insurance type with risk of buprenorphine discontinuation among commercial insurance and Medicaid enrollees initiated on buprenorphine. METHODS: In this observational, retrospective cohort study using the Merative MarketScan databases (2006-2016), we analyzed buprenorphine retention in 58,200 US adults with OUD. Predictor variables included insurance status (Medicaid vs commercial) and treatment setting, operationalized as substance use disorder (SUD) specialty treatment facility versus outpatient primary care physicians (PCPs) versus outpatient psychiatry, ascertained by linking physician visit codes to buprenorphine prescriptions. Treatment setting was inferred based on timing of prescriber visit claims preceding prescription fills. We estimated time to buprenorphine discontinuation using multivariable cox regression. RESULTS: Among enrollees with OUD receiving buprenorphine, 26,168 (45.0%) had prescriptions from SUD facilities without outpatient buprenorphine treatment, with the remaining treated by outpatient PCPs (n = 23,899, 41.1%) and psychiatrists (n = 8133, 13.9%). Overall, 50.6% and 73.3% discontinued treatment at 180 and 365 days respectively. Buprenorphine discontinuation was higher among enrollees receiving prescriptions from SUD facilities (aHR = 1.03[1.01-1.06]) and PCPs (aHR = 1.07[1.05-1.10]). Medicaid enrollees had lower buprenorphine retention than those with commercial insurance, particularly those receiving buprenorphine from SUD facilities and PCPs (aHR = 1.24[1.20-1.29] and aHR = 1.39[1.34-1.45] respectively, relative to comparator group of commercial insurance enrollees receiving buprenorphine from outpatient psychiatry). CONCLUSION: Buprenorphine discontinuation is high across outpatient PCP, psychiatry, and SUD treatment facility settings, with potentially lower treatment retention among Medicaid enrollees receiving care from SUD facilities and PCPs.

Simplified processing and rapid quantification of buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, and their conjugated metabolites in human plasma using UPLC-MS/MS: Assessment of buprenorphine exposure during opioid use disorder treatment.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a chronic neurobehavioral ailment and is prevalent in pregnancy. OUD is commonly treated with methadone or buprenorphine (BUP). Pregnancy is known to alter the pharmacokinetics of drugs and may lead to changes in drug exposure and response. A simple, specific, and sensitive analytical method for measuring the parent drug and its metabolites is valuable for assessing the impact of pregnancy on drug exposure. A new liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometric method that utilized a simple protein precipitation procedure for sample preparation and four deuterated internal standards for quantification was developed and validated for BUP and its major metabolites (norbuprenorphine [NBUP], buprenorphine-glucuronide [BUP-G], and norbuprenorphine-glucuronide [NBUP-G]) in human plasma. The standard curve was linear over the concentration range of 0.05-100 ng/mL for BUP and NBUP, and 0.1-200 ng/mL for BUP-G and NBUP-G. Intra- and inter-day bias and precision were within ±15% of nominal values for all the analytes. Quality controls assessed at four levels showed high recovery consistently for all the analytes with minimal matrix effect. Adequate analyte stability was observed at various laboratory conditions tested. Overall, the developed method is simple, sensitive, accurate and reproducible, and was successfully applied for the quantification of BUP and its metabolites in plasma samples collected from pregnant women in a clinical study assessing BUP exposure during OUD treatment.

Dysphagia as a Missing Link Between Post-surgical- and Opioid-Related Pneumonia.

PURPOSE: Postoperative pneumonia remains a common complication of surgery, despite increased attention. The purpose of our study was to determine the effects of routine surgery and post-surgical opioid administration on airway protection risk. METHODS: Eight healthy adult cats were evaluated to determine changes in airway protection status and for evidence of dysphagia in two experiments. (1) In four female cats, airway protection status was tracked following routine abdominal surgery (spay surgery) plus low-dose opioid administration (buprenorphine 0.015 mg/kg, IM, q8-12 h; n = 5). (2) Using a cross-over design, four naive cats (2 male, 2 female) were treated with moderate-dose (0.02 mg/kg) or high-dose (0.04 mg/kg) buprenorphine (IM, q8-12 h; n = 5). RESULTS: Airway protection was significantly affected in both experiments, but the most severe deficits occurred post-surgically as 75% of the animals exhibited silent aspiration. CONCLUSION: Oropharyngeal swallow is impaired by the partial mu-opioid receptor agonist buprenorphine, most remarkably in the postoperative setting. These findings have implications for the prevention and management of aspiration pneumonia in vulnerable populations.

"I want to stay here": Patient and staff perspectives on transitioning from a low-threshold buprenorphine program to clinic-based care.

BACKGROUND: The Project Connections At Re-Entry (PCARE) Van is a low-threshold buprenorphine program operating outside the Baltimore City Detention Center. Like other low-threshold programs, PCARE seeks to engage a vulnerable population in care, stabilize patients, then transition patients to longer-term care; however, <10% of patients transition to clinic-based buprenorphine treatment. Our goal was to better understand these low transition rates and center patient perspectives in discussion of broader low-threshold program design. METHODS: From December 2022 to June 2023, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 former and current PCARE patients and 6 staff members. We used deductive and inductive coding followed by thematic content analysis to identify themes around treatment experiences and care preferences. RESULTS: There were strong preferences among current and former patients for continuing buprenorphine treatment at the PCARE Van. Several themes emerged from the data that explained patient preferences, including both advantages to continuing care at the van (preference for continuity, feeling respected by the program's structure and philosophy) and disadvantages to transitioning to a clinic (perceived harms associated with rigid or punitive care models). Staff noted limited program capacity, and patients expressed that if needed, they would transition to a clinic for altruistic reasons. Staff expressed varied perspectives on low-threshold care, emphasizing both larger systems factors, as well as beliefs about individual patient responsibility. CONCLUSIONS: While many low-threshold care settings are designed as transitional bridge models, this research highlights patient preference for long-term care at low-threshold programs and supports efforts to adapt low-threshold models to be sustainable as longitudinal care.

Nine-year substance use treatment outcomes with buprenorphine for opioid use disorder in a federally qualified health center.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in primary care helps meet treatment demand, but few studies examine long-term treatment retention among medically-underserved primary care patients. METHODS: This 9-year retrospective study assessed overall retention at 6 months, and yearly up to 9 years, among 1451 patients with at least 6 months of buprenorphine prescription data from a federally-qualified health center (FQHC). We also examined whether patients who had gaps in treatment (>14 days without medication) later returned to care. Associations with treatment retention over total time in care were assessed. RESULTS: On average, patients received buprenorphine treatment for 2.26 years. Among patients who experienced gaps in treatment but returned to care within 90 days, 64% were still receiving buprenorphine at six months (n=930 of 1451), and 70% (n =118 of 169) at 9 years, with an average yearly interval retention of 69% (range: 58-74%). Patients were on MOUD treatment and not in a gap about 81% of the time, and averaged 1.0 gap per patient per year (SD: 1.09; range 0-7.87). The mean gap length over the treatment period was 33.16 days. Older age, higher percentages of negative opioid tests, negative cocaine tests, and positive buprenorphine tests, and having diabetes were associated with longer treatment retention. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid use disorder (OUD) can be treated successfully in primary care FQHCs. Treatment gaps are common and reflect the chronic relapsing nature of OUD.