A National Survey of Problem-Solving Court Staff Perceptions of In-Person versus Virtual Hearings.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, problem-solving courts adopted virtual hearings. We conducted an online nationwide survey with a convenience sample of court staff to elicit their perceptions of court participants' attendance, engagement, willingness to talk, and ability to form connection with judges during in-person versus virtual hearings. Sign tests compared ordinal ratings for perceptions of court participant outcomes during in-person versus virtual hearing modalities, and for audiovisual technology versus audio-only technology. The final analysis included 146 staff. Staff felt that during in-person hearings judges could form closer relationships with participants, quality of information exchanged was higher, and participants were more willing to talk. Staff rated attendance as high regardless of the modality. Staff felt participant engagement was higher with audiovisual technology than audio-only technology. Our results suggest that staff have concerns about effects of virtual hearings on court participant engagement and ability to form relationships with judges. Courts should address these potential negative effects of virtual hearings. We are concerned that staff perceived participants more negatively when participants used audio-only versus audiovisual technology, because technology access could be associated with participant demographic characteristics. Further research is needed to examine court participant perceptions and outcomes.

Impact of COVID-19 on Florida family dependency drug courts.

BACKGROUND: To promote parent-child reunification, family dependency drug courts (FDDCs) facilitate substance use disorder treatment for people whose children have been removed due to parental substance use. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted FDDC operations, forcing FDDCs to quickly adapt to new circumstances. Although existing research has examined COVID-19 impacts on adult drug courts and civil dependency courts, studies have yet to examine the impact of COVID-19 on FDDCs specifically. METHODS: To explore the impact of COVID-19 on FDDCs, we conducted 20 focus groups and 5 individual interviews with court team members from five Florida FDDCs between 2020 and 2022. Data were analyzed using iterative categorization. RESULTS: Five overarching themes emerged. First, FDDCs adopted virtual technology during the pandemic and more flexible drug screening policies. Second, virtual technology was perceived as improving hearing attendance but decreasing client engagement. FDDC team members discussed a potential hybrid in-person/virtual hearing model after the pandemic. Third, COVID-19 negatively impacted parent-child visitation opportunities, limiting development of bonds between parents and children, and parent-child bonding is a key consideration during judicial reunification decisions. Fourth, COVID-19 negatively impacted the mental health of court team members and clients. Court team members adopted new informal roles, such as providing technical support and emotional counseling to clients, in addition to regular responsibilities, resulting in feeling overwhelmed and overworked. Court team members described clients as feeling more depressed and anxious, in part due to limited visitation opportunities with children, which decreased clients' motivation for substance use recovery. Fifth, COVID-19 decreased recruitment of potential clients into FDDCs. CONCLUSIONS: If FDDCs continue to rely on virtual hearings beyond the pandemic, they must develop practices for improving client engagement during virtual hearings. FDDCs should preemptively develop procedures for improving parent-child visitation during future public health crises, because limited visitation opportunities could weaken parent-child bonding and, ultimately, the likelihood of reunification.

A Systematic Review of State Office-Based Buprenorphine Treatment Laws Effective During 2022: Counseling, Dosage, and Visit Frequency Requirements.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is among the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder. Even though the federal government recently eliminated the waiver requirement and patient limits applicable to office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT), among other settings, some states may still have policies imposing requirements on OBBT providers not required by federal law. METHODS: We collected statutes and regulations from 50 US states and the District of Columbia (ie, 51 jurisdictions) between August 11 and November 30, 2022 using the Nexis Uni legal database and search terms related to OBBT counseling, dosage, and/or frequency of visits. We then used template analysis, a mixed deductive-inductive qualitative method, to analyze legal content. RESULTS: Ten jurisdictions (20%) in 2022 had an OBBT counseling, dosage, and/or visit frequency requirement. Four jurisdictions had at least one law in each OBBT policy category examined. One-fifth of jurisdictions have OBBT policies not required under federal law. Five of these jurisdictions are among those with the highest overdose death rates per capita, according to publicly available data from 2021. Some OBBT requirements could potentially limit clinician interest in offering buprenorphine treatment or result in inadequate care (eg, if dosage limitations are too low.). CONCLUSIONS: Even though a federal waiver is no longer required for OBBT, our results suggests that at least some jurisdictions have other OBBT requirements, such as counseling, dosage, and/or frequency requirements. Given the severity of the ongoing opioid overdose crisis, policymakers should carefully consider the extent to which OBBT requirements are evidence based.

Racial and ethnic inequities in substance use treatment among women with opioid use disorder.

Background: Research describes inequities in substance use treatment, but few studies focus specifically on racial and ethnic disparities in a range of aspects of substance use treatment among women with opioid use disorder (OUD).Objective: To examine whether substance use treatment (i.e. receipt, sources, barriers) differs by race and ethnicity among women with opioid use disorder (OUD) and to identify factors associated with treatment gap (i.e. needing treatment but not receiving it).Methods: We performed cross-sectional analyses using National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2015-2019 data, restricted to non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, and Hispanic women with past-year OUD (unweighted n = 1089). We estimated the prevalence of aspects of treatment among racial and ethnic groups, and used modified Poisson regression to estimate correlates of reported treatment gap.Results: Approximately 68% of White versus 87% of Black and 81% of Hispanic women with OUD had a treatment gap (p-value 0.0034). Commonly reported barriers to treatment included prioritization, affordability, and stigma. Older age was associated with lower prevalence of treatment gap among all women [prevalence ratio (PR) = 0.83, and 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.76, 0.92], while criminal legal involvement and healthcare coverage was associated with a lower prevalence of treatment gap among Hispanic and White women only (past year arrest: Hispanic women PR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17, 0.86; White women PR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.82).Conclusions: Receipt of treatment is low among women with OUD, especially Black and Hispanic women. Intersectional intervention approaches are needed to increase access and reduce inequities.

Differences in medicaid expansion effects on buprenorphine treatment utilization by county rurality and income: A pharmacy data claims analysis from 2009-2018.

Background: Although use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder increased over the past decade, buprenorphine utilization remains limited in lower-income and rural areas. We examine how the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion influenced buprenorphine initiation rates by county income and evaluate how associations differ by county rural-urban status. Methods: This study used nationwide 2009-2018 IQVIA retail pharmacy data and a comparative interrupted time series framework-a hybrid framework combining regression discontinuity and difference-in-difference approaches. We used piecewise linear estimation to quantify changes in buprenorphine initiation rates before and after Medicaid expansion. Results: The sample included observations from 376,704 county-months. We identified 5,227,340 new buprenorphine treatment episodes, with an average of 9.2 new buprenorphine episodes per month per 100,000 county residents. Among urban counties, those with the lowest median incomes experienced significantly larger increases in buprenorphine initiation rates associated with Medicaid expansion than counties with higher median incomes (5-year rates difference est=3525.3, se=1695.3, p = 0.04). However, among rural counties, there was no significant association between buprenorphine initiation rates and county median income after Medicaid expansion (5-year rates difference est=979.0, se=915.8, p = 0.29). Conclusions: Medicaid expansion was associated with a reduction in income-related buprenorphine disparities in urban counties, but not in rural counties. To achieve more equitable buprenorphine access, future policies should target low-income rural areas.

How are state telehealth policies associated with services offered by substance use disorder treatment facilities? Evidence from 2019 to 2022.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led several states to adopt policies permitting the delivery of substance use disorder treatment (SUDT) by telehealth. We assess the impact of state-level telehealth policies in 2020 that specifically permitted audio or audiovisual forms of telehealth offerings among SUDT facilities. PROCEDURE: Cross-sectional analysis of secondary data from between 2019 and 2022. Pre-pandemic, federal law permitted states to allow audiovisual telehealth modes for SUDT to a limited extent. 2020 laws permitted states to allow audio-only modes for the first time and strengthened ability to offer audiovisual modes. We compared national SUDT facility self-reported telehealth offerings in 2020 and beyond to 2019, in states that in 2020 had policies permitting audiovisual and audio only, compared to other states. MAIN FINDINGS: Among outpatient SUDT facilities (n = 5227) present in all four years of our data, the proportion offering telehealth increased from 18% (n = 921) in 2019-26% in 2020, 60% in 2021, and 79% in 2022. We estimate an audiovisual and audio only policy in 2020 was associated with an increase in telehealth offering rates in 2022 of +16.5% points (pp) (95% CI [+10.4,+22.6]) compared to the rates in states with no such listed policy. There was little evidence of an influence on telehealth offering in 2020 (-2.9 pp, CI [-9.0,+3.2]) and 2021 (+0.6 pp, CI [-5.5,+6.7]). CONCLUSIONS: The enactment of state-level telehealth policies that allow audio and audiovisual modalities may have increased SUDT facilities' likelihood of offering telehealth services two years after enactment.

Will the End of the X-Waiver Expand Access to Buprenorphine Treatment? Achieving the Full Potential of the 2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act.

The 2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act repealed the special waiver for prescribing buprenorphine to patients with opioid use disorder, a bipartisan goal long sought by advocates. The change has symbolic importance in recognizing that buprenorphine is a mainstream medical treatment. We argue that the maximum potential of the law can be achieved by addressing three bottlenecks. First, it is important that new training requirements for all controlled substances prescribers be grounded in scientific principles of addiction treatment and are robustly evaluated to ensure they meet quality standards. Second, even with the elimination of the waiver, there are potential constraints from state law such as state-specific requirements that practitioners require counseling or obtain a separate credential, and many states also have limiting scope of practice regulations. We recommend that these requirements are eased wherever possible to improve treatment access. Third, it is critical to build onramps to treatment in settings such as primary care, hospitals, and correctional facilities. While we anticipate that buprenorphine prescribing will primarily occur in high-volume practices, there is the potential to activate a broader workforce to serve as entry points to care. We conclude that the stage is set for significant increases in lifesaving treatment but the difficult task ahead is ensuring that the resources and training are available to build strong capacity.

Operationalizing person-centered care in residential substance use disorder treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Person-centered care (PCC) is an ethical imperative with eight domains, but operation of some PCC domains in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment has been underexplored. OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify strategies for operationalizing eight PCC domains in SUD treatment facilities and themes across these strategies. METHODS: We recruited 36 clients and staff from a large publicly funded behavioral health system for individual, semi-structured qualitative interviews. Interviews explored preferences and care experiences for each PCC domain. We analyzed data using iterative categorization, identifying specific operationalization strategies and themes across operationalization strategies within each domain. RESULTS: PCC operationalization themes for residential SUD treatment included addressing social vulnerability of clients (e.g., through assistance with housing and navigation of criminal/legal systems), involving peer support specialists (e.g., to provide emotional support and aid transition out of care), supporting the client's family throughout treatment (e.g., providing progress updates; increasing visitation opportunities in residential treatment), and facilitating patient choice within each domain (e.g., treatment type; housing type; roommate preferences in residential treatment.). DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION: Some PCC operationalization strategies are unique to SUD treatment. Several PCC operationalization strategies applied to multiple domains, suggesting conceptual overlap between domains.

Urine drug testing in the context of opioid analgesic prescribing for chronic pain: a content analysis of U.S. state laws in 2022.

BACKGROUND: In response to the opioid crisis, U.S. states have passed laws requiring urine drug testing (UDT) when opioid analgesics are prescribed for chronic pain. We sought to identify state law UDT requirements. METHODS: We searched NexisUni legal database using terms related to UDT, chronic pain, and opioids. We included laws effective during spring 2022 that required UDT when opioids were prescribed for chronic pain. We performed deductive content analysis, coding laws for mandated UDT frequency, type of clinician and type of payer to whom the law applied, and circumstances under which UDT was mandated. RESULTS: We found 32 laws across 13 states that met our inclusion criteria. UDT requirements varied substantially by state, including with regard to the type of clinician to whom the law applied, the mandated frequency of UDT (eg, at initiation/assessment, at least annually, more than once per year), and the circumstances in which UDT was mandated (eg, patient had substance use disorder; dosage/day threshold). DISCUSSION: Relatively few states have UDT mandates associated with prescribing opioids as chronic pain treatment. When developing policy indicators for empirical studies, researchers evaluating how UDT policy affects health outcomes must consider the complexity and lack of uniformity of UDT requirements. In addition, even if states mandate UDT, it is unclear whether clinicians understand the best way to use the test results.

US state laws relevant to incentives for health behavior: A qualitative analysis.

Contingency management (CM) involves provision of incentives for positive health behaviors via a well-defined protocol and is among the most effective treatments for patients with substance use disorders (SUDs). An understanding of laws affecting incentives for health behaviors and outcomes, including contexts in which incentives are already permitted, could inform efforts to disseminate CM. We conducted a systematic NexisUni legal database review of state statutes and regulations effective during 2022 to identify (a) laws that explicitly permit or prohibit delivery of incentives to patients, employees, or insurance beneficiaries for SUD-specific behaviors or outcomes, and (b) laws that explicitly permit delivery of incentives for any health behaviors or outcomes. We identified 27 laws across 17 jurisdictions that explicitly permit delivery of incentives for SUD-related behaviors or outcomes, with most occurring in the context of wellness programs. No state laws were identified that explicitly prohibit SUD-specific incentives. More broadly, we identified 57 laws across 29 jurisdictions permitting incentives for any health outcomes (both SUD- and non-SUD-related). These laws occurred in the contexts of wellness programs, K-12/early childhood education, government public health promotion, and SUD treatment provider licensing. Considering the urgent need to expand evidence-based SUD treatment in rural and underserved areas throughout the US, these findings could inform efforts to develop laws explicitly permitting provision of incentives in SUD care and enhance efforts to disseminate CM more broadly.

Key person-centered care domains for residential substance use disorder treatment facilities: former clients' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: While person-centered care (PCC) includes multiple domains, residential substance use disorder (SUD) treatment clients may value certain domains over others. We sought to identify the PCC domains most valued by former residential SUD treatment clients. We also sought to explore conceptual distinctions between potential theoretical PCC subdomains. METHODS: We distributed an online survey via social media to a national convenience sample of former residential SUD treatment clients. Respondents were presented with ten PCC domains in an online survey: (a) access to evidence-based care; (b) integration of care; (c) diversity/respect for other cultures; (d) individualization of care; (e) emotional support; (f) family involvement in treatment; (g) transitional services; (h) aftercare; (i) physical comfort; and (j) information provision. Respondents were asked to select up to two domains they deemed most important to their residential SUD treatment experience. We used descriptive statistics to identify response frequencies and logistic regression to predict relationships between selected domains and respondents' race, gender, relationship status, parenting status, and housing stability. RESULTS: Our final sample included 435 former residential SUD treatment clients. Diversity and respect for different cultures was the most frequently selected domain (29%), followed by integration of care (26%), emotional support (26%), and individualization of care (26%). Provision of information was the least frequently chosen domain (3%). Race and ethnicity were not predictive of selecting respect for diversity. Also, parental status, relationship status and gender were not predictive of selecting family integration. Employment and housing status were not predictive of selecting transitional services. CONCLUSIONS: While residential SUD treatment facilities should seek to implement PCC across all domains, our results suggest facilities should prioritize (a) operationalizing diversity, (b) integration of care, and (c) emotional support. Significant heterogeneity exists regarding PCC domains deemed most important to clients. PCC domains valued by clients cannot be easily predicted based on client demographics.

Problem-Solving Court Staff Preferences for Educational Videos about Medications for Opioid Use Disorder.

Problem-solving courts use an interdisciplinary approach with treatment mandates, hearings, and monitoring to rehabilitate individuals arrested for drug-related crimes or lost custody of children due to drug use. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are the standard of care for treating opioid use disorder (OUD), but few problem-solving court clients with OUD are referred to MOUD. Previous studies found court staff often harbor misconceptions about MOUD and could benefit from MOUD education. Tailoring education to the intended audience is an educational best practice. We sought to identify content and style preferences for two MOUD education videos: 1) an introduction to MOUD and, 2) MOUD myths/misconceptions.We recruited 40 Florida problem-solving court staff. Using semi-structured interviews, invited document/script edits, and qualitative surveys, we collected data at each of four video development stages. We used template analysis for qualitative data.Court staff desired the following content: OUD as a chronic brain condition and MOUD as an effective response; MOUD risks and benefits; how MOUD is accessed; and the appropriate role of court staff with MOUD decisions. Style preferences were: no juvenile/cutesy animation; relatable characters/environments; simple concept illustration; individualizing the learning experience; and combinations of scientific animated videos and successful stakeholder interviews.Our findings reinforce the importance of tailoring MOUD education to the audience. Court staff's wish for education about their appropriate role with MOUD reflects their unique position making treatment referrals. Court staff's desire for stakeholder recordings of success stories mirrors the importance of opinion leaders in other dissemination studies.

Association of Selected State Policies and Requirements for Buprenorphine Treatment With Per Capita Months of Treatment.

Importance: Expanding the use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder is a critical component of the US response to the opioid crisis, but few studies have examined how state policies are associated with buprenorphine dispensing. Objective: To examine the association of 6 selected state policies with the rate of individuals receiving buprenorphine per 1000 county residents. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used 2006 to 2018 US retail pharmacy claims data for individuals dispensed buprenorphine formulations indicated for treating opioid use disorder. Exposures: State implementation of policies requiring additional education for buprenorphine prescribers beyond waiver training, continuing medical education related to substance misuse and addiction, Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine, Medicaid expansion, mandatory prescriber use of prescription drug monitoring programs, and pain management clinic laws were examined. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was buprenorphine treatment months per 1000 county residents as measured using multivariable longitudinal models. Statistical analyses were conducted from September 1, 2021, through April 30, 2022, with revised analyses conducted through February 28, 2023. Results: The mean (SD) number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 persons nationally increased steadily from 1.47 (0.04) in 2006 to 22.80 (0.55) in 2018. Requiring that buprenorphine prescribers receive additional education beyond that required to obtain the federal X-waiver was associated with significant increases in the number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in the 5 years following implementation of the requirement (from 8.51 [95% CI, 2.36-14.64] months in year 1 to 14.43 [95% CI, 2.61-26.26] months in year 5). Requiring continuing medical education for physician licensure related to substance misuse or addiction was associated with significant increases in buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in each of the 5 years following policy implementation (from 7.01 [95% CI, 3.17-10.86] months in the first year to 11.43 [95% CI, 0.61-22.25] months in the fifth year). None of the other policies examined was associated with a significant change in buprenorphine months of treatment per 1000 county residents. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of US pharmacy claims, state-mandated educational requirements beyond the initial training required to prescribe buprenorphine were associated with increased buprenorphine use over time. The findings suggest requiring education for buprenorphine prescribers and training in substance use disorder treatment for all controlled substance prescribers as an actionable proposal for increasing buprenorphine use, ultimately serving more patients. No single policy lever can ensure adequate buprenorphine supply; however, policy maker attention to the benefits of enhancing clinician education and knowledge may help to expand buprenorphine access.

Buprenorphine Treatment For Opioid Use Disorder: Comparison Of Insurance Restrictions, 2017-21.

Buprenorphine is a treatment medication that decreases mortality risks among people with opioid use disorder (OUD). Despite its efficacy, buprenorphine is underused in the US. Insurance restrictions are commonly cited as barriers to buprenorphine prescribing. Using Medicaid, Medicare Advantage, and commercial insurance formulary files, we examined insurance-imposed utilization restrictions for buprenorphine for OUD for each year from 2017 to 2021 by insurance type. Almost all plans covered immediate-release buprenorphine in 2021, with a general trend of decreasing prior authorization requirements and quantity limits since 2017. In contrast, two payers had relatively low coverage of extended-release buprenorphine, with only 46 percent of commercial plans and only 19 percent of Medicare Advantage plans covering this formulation. Even though most Medicaid plans covered extended-release buprenorphine in 2021, 37 percent required prior authorization. Policy makers and researchers concerned with buprenorphine insurance barriers should shift their attention to extended-release buprenorphine. State lawmakers could help address these barriers by mandating that insurers include extended-release buprenorphine on their preferred drug lists.

Legal Limitations Associated with Microdosing Buprenorphine.

Background: Opioid overdose deaths in the U.S. continue to increase, largely due to the prevalence of fentanyl, a very powerful opioid, in the illicit drug supply. Buprenorphine treatment is effective for treating opioid use disorder, but it can be challenging for clinicians to introduce buprenorphine treatment to people who use fentanyl due to risks of precipitated withdrawal. Induction could be facilitated through a buprenorphine microdosing approach called "the Bernese method." Objective: In this commentary, we describe how federal laws inadvertently limit optimal use of the Bernese method and how federal laws could be reformed to facilitate use of the Bernese method. Results: The Bernese method requires patients to continue using the opioid of misuse (e.g., fentanyl) for seven to ten days while receiving very low doses of buprenorphine. Under federal law, the typical office-based buprenorphine prescriber can neither prescribe nor administer fentanyl short-term for buprenorphine induction purposes, essentially forcing patients to continue to temporarily obtain fentanyl via the illicit market. Conclusion: The federal government has already indicated its support for increasing buprenorphine access. We argue that the government should permit short-term dispensing of fentanyl to office-based patients undergoing buprenorphine induction.

Buprenorphine involvement in opioid overdose deaths: A retrospective analysis of postmortem toxicology in Marion County, Indiana, 2015-2021.

Background: Amidst an unprecedented overdose epidemic, the opioid partial agonist buprenorphine is a medication for opioid use disorder associated with reductions in overdose. Despite its efficacy, buprenorphine prescribing remains closely regulated, owing to concerns about misuse, and its possible role in overdoses. Methods: A retrospective analysis of the Marion County, Indiana coroner's postmortem toxicology data for unintentional opioid-involved overdose deaths from 2015 through 2021. The county was chosen as a novel setting whose corner provided comprehensive overdose data. It contains Indianapolis, a large city in the US Midwest The 2,369 opioid-involved overdoses were analyzed for the presence of buprenorphine and its metabolite, as wel as potent substances associated with illicit drug use and overdose. Results: Of the 2,369 postmortem toxicology records analyzed, 55 (2.3%) indicated presence of buprenorphine. Of buprenorphine-involved cases, 51 (92.7%) involved other potent substances such as fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, methadone, and amphetamines; 4 (7.3%) were attributed to buprenorphine and liver failure, diabetic ketoacidosis, or relatively less potent substances. Fentanyl was present in 28 cases (50.9%), benzodiazepines were present in 24 (43.6%). Black opioid decedents were considerably less likely to have buprenorphine in their toxicology than White decedents. Conclusions: Buprenorphine was rarely detected in the postmortem toxicology of unintentional opioid overdoses in a major US city in the Midwest. In nearly all cases it was accompanied by other potent substances that more frequently cause fatal overdoses on their own. This study confirms findings from other geographic settings that the overdose mortality risks associated with buprenorphine are low.

Prior authorization restrictions on medications for opioid use disorder: trends in state laws from 2005 to 2019.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs) - including methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone - are the most effective treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD). Historically, insurers have required prior authorization for MOUD, but prior authorization is often reported as a key barrier to MOUD prescribing. Some states have passed laws prohibiting MOUD prior authorization requirements. We sought to identify the frequency of MOUD prior authorization prohibitions in state laws and to categorize types of prohibitions. METHODS: We searched for regulations and statutes present in all U.S. states and Washington DC between 2005 and 2019 using MOUD-related terms in Westlaw legal software. In qualitative software, we coded laws discussing MOUD prior authorization using template analysis - a mixed deductive/inductive approach. Finally, we used coded laws to identify frequencies of states with prior authorization prohibitions, including changes over time. RESULTS: No states had laws prohibiting MOUD prior authorization between 2005 and 2015, with the first prohibition appearing in 2016. By 2019, fifteen states had MOUD prior authorization prohibitions. States varied significantly in their approach to prohibiting MOUD prior authorization. In 2019, it was more common for states to have MOUD prior authorization prohibitions applying to all insurers (n = 10 states) than to only Medicaid (n = 7 states) or only non-Medicaid insurers (n = 1 state). In 2019, general prior authorization prohibitions (n = 10 states) were more common than prohibitions only applicable to medications on the formulary, prohibitions only applicable to medications on the preferred drug list, prohibitions only applicable during the first 5 days of treatment, and prohibitions only applicable during the first 30 days of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The number of states with an MOUD prior authorization law prohibition increased in recent years. Such laws could help expand access to life-saving OUD treatments by making it easier for clinicians to prescribe MOUD.KEY MESSAGESNo states had MOUD prior authorization prohibitions between 2005 and 2015 in state statutes or regulations, and only one state had such a prohibition in 2016.By 2019, fifteen states had an MOUD prior authorization prohibition law.States varied significantly in their approach to prohibiting MOUD prior authorization, including with respect to the insurer type, duration of the prohibition, and applicable medication.

Systematic Identification and Categorization of Opioid Prescribing and Dispensing Policies in 16 States and Washington, DC.

OBJECTIVES: State policies can impact opioid prescribing or dispensing. Some state opioid policies have been widely examined in empirical studies, including prescription drug monitoring programs and pain clinic licensure requirements. Other relevant policies might exist that have received limited attention. Our objective was to identify and categorize a wide range of state policies that could affect opioid prescribing/dispensing. METHODS: We used stratified random sampling to select 16 states and Washington, DC, for our sample. We collected state regulations and statutes effective during 2020 from each jurisdiction, using search terms related to opioids, pain management, and prescribing/dispensing. We then conducted qualitative template analysis of the data to identify and categorize policy categories. RESULTS: We identified three dimensions of opioid prescribing/dispensing laws: the prescribing/dispensing rule, its applicability, and its disciplinary consequences. Policy categories of prescribing/dispensing rules included clinic licensure, staff credentials, evaluating the appropriateness of opioids, limiting the initiation of opioids, preventing the diversion or misuse of opioids, and enhancing patient safety. Policy categories related to applicability of the law included the pain type, substance type, practitioner, setting, payer, and prescribing situation. The disciplinary consequences dimension included specific consequences and inspection processes. DISCUSSION: Policy categories within each dimension of opioid prescribing/dispensing laws could become a foundation for creating variables to support empirical analyses of policy effects, improving operationalization of policies in empirical studies, and helping to disentangle the effects of multiple state laws enacted at similar times to address the opioid crisis. Several of the policy categories we identified have been underexplored in previous empirical studies.

Analysis of US County Characteristics and Clinicians With Waivers to Prescribe Buprenorphine After Changes in Federal Education Requirements.

This cross-sectional study investigates the growth in the number of clinicians in the US who obtained waivers for prescribing buprenorphine after the elimination of federal educational requirements.

Perceptions of buprenorphine barriers and efficacy among nurse practitioners and physician assistants.

BACKGROUND: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUDs), including methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone, decrease mortality and morbidity for people with opioid use disorder (OUD). Buprenorphine and methadone have the strongest evidence base among MOUDs. Unlike methadone, buprenorphine may be prescribed in office-based settings in the U.S., including by nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) who have a federal waiver and adhere to federal patient limits. Buprenorphine is underutilized nationally, particularly in rural areas, and NPs/PAs could help address this gap. Therefore, we sought to identify perceptions of buprenorphine efficacy and perceptions of prescribing barriers among NPs/PAs. We also sought to compare perceived buprenorphine efficacy and perceived prescribing barriers between waivered and non-waivered NPs/PAs, as well as to compare perceived buprenorphine efficacy to perceived naltrexone and methadone efficacy. METHODS: We disseminated an online survey to a random national sample of NPs/PAs. We used Mann-Whitney U tests to compare between waivered and non-waivered respondents. We used non-parametric Friedman tests and post-hoc Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare perceptions of medication types. RESULTS: 240 respondents participated (6.5% response rate). Most respondents agreed buprenorphine is efficacious and believed counseling and peer support should complement buprenorphine. Buprenorphine was generally perceived as more efficacious than both naltrexone and methadone. Perceived buprenorphine efficacy and prescribing barriers differed by waiver status. Non-waivered practitioners were more likely than waivered practitioners to have concerns about buprenorphine affecting patient mix. Among waivered NPs/PAs, key buprenorphine prescribing barriers were insurance prior authorization and detoxification access. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that different policies should target perceived barriers affecting waivered versus non-waivered NPs/PAs. Concerns about patient mix suggest stigmatization of patients with OUD. NP/PA education is needed about comparative medication efficaciousness, particularly regarding methadone. Even though many buprenorphine treatment patients benefits from counseling and/or peer support groups, NPs/PAs should be informed that such psychosocial treatment methods are not necessary for all buprenorphine patients.