Evaluation of peer recovery services for substance use disorder in Minnesota: Impact of peer recovery initiation on SUD treatment and recovery.

Substance use disorder (SUD) remains one of the most persistent public health challenges across the nation and in Minnesota. One intervention to help people with SUD is peer recovery services (PRS). PRS is a form on non-clinical support where trained individuals who are more established in recovery come alongside people currently in the recovery journey and provide guidance in the treatment process, help in accessing resources, and offer an empathetic ear. In combination with other services in the continuum of care, PRS seeks to reduce harm from disordered use. In 2018, Minnesota made PRS for SUD a Medicaid reimbursable service. While prior literature demonstrates promising effects of PRS for SUD, especially in treatment retention and participant experience, most studies evaluated PRS in limited settings, rather than in a large-scale implementation. Our retrospective, matched-cohort study used administrative data to estimate the impact of initiating Medicaid-reimbursable PRS for SUD on treatment, overdose, and mortality. Our results align, in some dimensions, with prior literature evaluating smaller-scale programs with positive impacts on treatment completion. We also find, however, that PRS at scale did not produce other positive outcomes that past studies have documented, particularly around overdose and inpatient treatment. This suggests that PRS follows a common challenge of implementing promising ideas at scale.

A Randomized Trial Of Letters To Encourage Prescription Monitoring Program Use And Safe Opioid Prescribing.

To facilitate safer prescribing of opioids and other drugs, nearly all states operate prescription monitoring programs (PMPs), which collect and share data on controlled substance dispensing. Policy makers have sought to raise clinicians' engagement with these programs but lack evidence on effective interventions. Working with the Minnesota Prescription Monitoring Program, we conducted a randomized trial to assess whether letters to clinicians increased program use and decreased risky coprescribing of opioids with benzodiazepines or gabapentinoids. In March 2021 we randomly assigned 12,000 coprescribers to either a control arm or one of three study arms sent differing letters. The respective letters highlighted a new mandate to check the PMP before prescribing, provided information about coprescribing risks with a list of coprescribed patients, or contained both messages combined. Letters highlighting the mandate alone or along with coprescribing information increased PMP search rates by 4.5 and 4.0 percentage points, respectively, with no significant effect on coprescribing. These letters also increased PMP account-holding rates among clinicians. Effects persisted for at least eight months. The letter with only coprescribing information had no detected effects on key outcomes. Our results support the use of simple letter interventions as evidence-based tools to increase PMP engagement and potentially facilitate better-informed prescribing.

Prescription drug monitoring program use by opioid prescribers: a cross-sectional study.

Clinician use of prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) has been linked to better patient outcomes, but state requirements to use PDMPs are unevenly enforced. We assessed PDMP use in Minnesota, which requires opioid prescribers to hold accounts and, in most cases, search the PDMP before prescribing, but where enforcement authority is limited. Using 2023 PDMP data, we found that 4 in 10 opioid prescribers did not search and 2 in 10 did not hold an account. PDMP use was strongly associated with prescribing volume, but even among the top decile of opioid prescribers, 8% never searched the PDMP. Thirty-two percent of opioid fills came from clinicians who did not search the PDMP. Failures to use the PDMP may be driven by a lack of information about state requirements, beliefs that these requirements are not enforced, and the costs of accessing the PDMP relative to the benefits. These results highlight the potential for policy makers to promote safer and better-informed prescribing of opioids and other drugs by addressing the forces that have limited PDMP use so far.

Association of Project ECHO Training With Buprenorphine Prescribing by Primary Care Clinicians in Minnesota for Treating Opioid Use Disorder.

Importance: Buprenorphine is an approved medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD); however, prescribing buprenorphine is limited by a requirement to obtain a waiver to prescribe it (hereinafter, "DATA [Drug Abuse Treatment Act]-waiver") and a lack of knowledge of the best practices among clinicians. Objective: To examine how Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) telementoring is associated with changes in DATA-waiver attainment and buprenorphine prescribing among primary care clinicians in Minnesota. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective matched-cohort study of 918 clinicians, ECHO-trained clinicians were enrolled on the date they first attended ECHO (January 3, 2018, to June 11, 2020); comparison clinicians were assigned an enrollment date from the distribution of the first ECHO sessions. The baseline period was 12 months preceding enrollment, with follow-up for 18 months or until June 30, 2020. The ECHO-trained clinicians were a population-based sample of primary care clinicians who treated Medicaid patients in Minnesota 12 months prior to the initiation of ECHO training. This analysis used propensity score matching to select comparison clinicians who were similar across demographic and clinical practice characteristics at baseline in a 2:1 ratio. Follow-up was available for 167 ECHO-trained clinicians (54.6%) and 330 comparison clinicians (53.9%) at 18 months. Exposures: ECHO-trained clinicians attended at least 1 weekly, hour-long ECHO session. Comparison clinicians never participated in any ECHO sessions. Main Outcomes and Measures: DATA-waiver attainment, any buprenorphine prescribing, and the percentage of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) who were prescribed buprenorphine. Results: The final sample included 918 clinicians (ECHO-trained [306]; comparison [612]), of whom 620 (67.5%) practiced outside the metropolitan Twin Cities (Minneapolis-St Paul) region. The mean (SD) age of the ECHO-trained clinicians was 46.0 (12.1) years and that of the comparison clinicians was 45.7 (12.3) years. Relative to the changes among the matched comparison clinicians, the ECHO-trained clinicians were more likely to obtain a DATA-waiver (difference-in-differences, 22.7 percentage points; 95% CI, 15.5-29.9 percentage points; P < .001) and prescribe any buprenorphine (16.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 10.4-22.5 percentage points; P < .001) after 6 quarters of follow-up. ECHO-trained clinicians prescribed buprenorphine to a greater share of patients with OUD (a difference of 7.6 percentage points per month; 95% CI, 4.6-10.6 percentage points per month; P < .001), relative to that prescribed by the comparison clinicians. Conclusions and Relevance: According to the findings of this matched-cohort study, ECHO telementoring may be associated with greater prescribing of buprenorphine by primary care clinicians. These findings suggest that Project ECHO training could be a useful tool for expanding access to MOUD.