States' investment in recovery support services: An exploratory analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Recovery support services (RSS), while not yet precisely defined, nevertheless have a longstanding role in managing chronic illnesses including substance use disorders (SUDs). This exploratory study is the first to identify the amounts of money that states invest from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Block Grants; SAMHSA discretionary grant and state-appropriated sources; the types of organizations from which RSS are purchased; and the non-financial supports states provide for RSS. METHODS: The study is a mixed method exploratory analysis, based on three data sources: content analysis of all 51 (Washington, D.C. included) Substance Abuse Block Grant (SABG) state applications; in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of ten states and one territory; and a structured electronic survey sent to all SABG recipients. Forty states and 2 territories returned a total of 42 questionnaires from 56 possible states and territories (75%). Thirty-two of the responding states provided complete FY2022 financial data. RESULTS: States reporting financial data spent $412 million from SABG, SAMHSA discretionary grants, and state appropriations for RSS. An estimate based on extrapolating regionally grouped per capita spending averages to non-responding state populations projected $775 million spent from these sources for all states. The study also calculated per capita and SUD prevalent population expenditures from these sources for each state. States purchase services from recovery community organizations and SUD treatment organizations in equal proportions, as well as from statewide recovery support organizations, educational institutions, hospitals, community health centers, and justice system organizations. Purchased services are not uniformly defined, but include community centers, peer staff, housing, and other support services. States provide non-financial support in forms that include technical assistance, community engagement, practice guidelines, and regulatory frameworks. CONCLUSIONS: This first report of states' investments establishes a baseline to serve as a reference point for future analysis of these expenditures, as well as a foundation to which other sources of RSS funding such as Medicaid and other state and federal (e.g. HRSA, CDC, DOJ) dollars may be added. Uniform definitions for RSS will be necessary to support future reporting, accountability, and research. Finally, newly formed peer-based provider organizations need particular attention in order to be sustainable.

A Qualitative Exploration of Attitudes Toward Global Positioning System Tracking and Ecological Momentary Assessment Among Individuals in Substance Use Treatment.

BACKGROUND: The use of tracking technology in substance use research can uncover the role of contextual factors, such as social networks and environmental cues, in triggering cravings and precipitating return to use. Few studies have explored the opinions of individuals in substance use treatment related to tracking technology. METHODS: We conducted 30 semi-structured interviews with individuals in substance use treatment facilities in Connecticut and Georgia. Interviews were not limited to individuals with any specific substance use disorder. Interviewers described a hypothetical study involving ecological momentary assessment and global positioning system tracking to examine place-based predictors of substance use. Participants were invited to share reactions to this description. We used thematic analysis to identify themes in participant perceptions of this hypothetical research study. RESULTS: Most participants shared positive opinions about study participation and expressed little to no concern about the tracking components. Participant concerns focused on the security of their information and the potential burden of responding to study questions. Participants largely understood the importance of study participation for promoting greater understanding of substance use and identified potential therapeutic effects of study participation on their own recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals in substance use treatment expressed little concern with research studies or interventions incorporating mobile-tracking elements. Future studies should explore the responsible use of tracking elements in recovery support interventions.

Technical violations and infractions are drivers of disengagement from methadone treatment among people with opioid use disorder discharged from Connecticut jails 2014-2018.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the interaction between arrests for technical violations vs. receiving new charges with receiving community-based methadone treatment on time-to reincarceration (TTR) in a cohort of men with opioid use disorder (OUD) released from custody from two Connecticut jails from 2014 to 2018. METHODS: Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated for time to reincarceration for technical violations/infractions, misdemeanors only, felonies only, and both misdemeanors and felonies after adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, and receiving methadone treatment during incarceration or in the community following release. Moderation analyses tested the hypotheses that the benefits of receiving methadone in jail or the community on TTR were significantly different for people with only technical violations and infractions compared to misdemeanor and felony charges. RESULTS: In the sample of 788 men who were reincarcerated, 29.4% received technical violations with no new charges (n = 232) with the remainder of the sample receiving new charges consisting of 26.9% new misdemeanor charges, 6.5% felony charges, and 37.2% both felony and misdemeanor charges. Compared to men who received new misdemeanor charges, TTR was significantly shorter among those who received technical violations and infractions with no new charges amounting to a 50% increase in TTR (334.5 days, SD = 321.3 vs. 228.1 days, SD = 308.0, p < 0.001; aHR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.3, 1.8, p < 0.001). TTR of men who resumed methadone and were charged with a new crime was 50% longer than those who resumed methadone and received technical violations/infractions with no new charges. (230.2 days, SD = 340.2 vs. 402.3 days, SD = 231.3; aHR = 1.5, 95%CI = 1.0, 2.2, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Reducing technical violations may enhance the benefits of providing community-based methadone following release from incarceration on extending the time between incarcerations during the vulnerable time post-incarceration and reduce the burden on correctional systems.

Contingency Management and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Adherence Support Services (CoMPASS): A hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation study to promote HIV risk reduction among people who inject drugs.

BACKGROUND: HIV disproportionally affects persons who inject drugs (PWID), but engagement with HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is low. We describe the rationale and study design for a new study, "Contingency Management and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Adherence Support Services (CoMPASS)," a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial to promote HIV risk reduction among PWID. METHODS: In four community-based programs in the northeastern United States, PrEP-eligible PWID (target n = 526) are randomized to treatment as usual or Contingency Management (CM) and, as indicated, stepped up to PrEP Adherence Support Services (CoMPASS) over 24 weeks. During CM sessions, participants receive timely tangible rewards for verifiable activities demonstrating 1) PrEP initiation and adherence, and 2) engagement with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and other OUD-related care. Participants who do not have high levels of biomarker-confirmed PrEP adherence at week 12 will be stepped up to receive PrEP Adherence Support Services (PASS) consisting of strengths-based case management over 12 weeks. Interventions are delivered by trained PrEP navigators, staff embedded within the respective sites. The primary outcome is sustained PrEP adherence by dried blood spot testing at 24 weeks. To inform future implementation, we are conducting implementation-focused process evaluations throughout the clinical trial. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this protocol are anticipated to yield novel findings regarding the impact and scalability of CoMPASS to promote HIV prevention among PWID in partnership with community-based organizations. http://ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04738825.

Barriers and Facilitators to HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Uptake Among Men Who have Sex with Men Who Use Stimulants: A Qualitative Study.

The HIV epidemic disproportionately impacts men who have sex with men (MSM), particularly those who use stimulants. We explored barriers and facilitators to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake among this population. From June 2018 through February 2019, we conducted semi-structured interviews in Providence, Rhode Island, and New Haven, Connecticut, with 21 MSM who reported recent (past six months) stimulant use. We identified individual, interpersonal, and structural barriers to PrEP, including: (1) high awareness but mixed knowledge of PrEP, resulting in concerns about side effects and drug interactions; (2) interest that was partly determined by substance use and perceived HIV risk; (3) fragmented and constrained social networks not conducive to disseminating PrEP information; and (4) PrEP access, such as insurance coverage and cost. Our findings suggest potential approaches to increase PrEP uptake in this group, including promotion through mainstream and social media, clarifying misinformation, and facilitating increased access through structural interventions.

RESUMEN: La epidemia del VIH afecta de manera desproporcionada a los hombres que tienen sexo con hombres (HSH), particularmente a aquellos que usan estimulantes. Exploramos las barreras y los facilitadores para la adopción de la profilaxis previa a la exposición (PrEP) en esta población. Desde junio de 2018 hasta febrero de 2019, realizamos entrevistas semiestructuradas en Providence, Rhode Island y New Haven, Connecticut, con 21 HSH que nos informaron de haber usado estimulantes recientemente (en los últimos seis meses). Identificamos barreras individuales, interpersonales, y estructurales para la PrEP, que incluyen: (1) gran conciencia pero conocimiento mixto de la PrEP, lo que produce preocupaciones sobre los efectos secundarios y las interacciones farmacológicas; (2) interés que fue determinado en parte por el uso de sustancias y el riesgo percibido de VIH; (3) redes sociales fragmentadas y restringidas que no conducen a la difusión de información sobre la PrEP; y (4) problemas con el acceso a la PrEP, como la cobertura y el costo del seguro. Nuestros hallazgos sugieren enfoques potenciales para aumentar la aceptación de la PrEP en esta población, incluida la promoción a través de los medios tradicionales y sociales, aclarando la información errónea, y facilitando un mayor acceso a través de intervenciones estructurales.

Substance Use Treatment Engagement among Men Who Have Sex with Men Who Use Stimulants in the Northeastern United States.

BACKGROUND: Stimulant use is increasing in the United States (U.S.), especially among men who have sex with men (MSM). Objectives: We sought to ascertain barriers and facilitators to substance use treatment utilization among MSM who use stimulants in the northeastern U.S. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with MSM who reported recent stimulant use. Interviews explored perceptions of and experiences with substance use treatment. We used thematic analysis to identify factors that facilitated or impeded substance use treatment engagement. Results: We interviewed 21 MSM in Providence, Rhode Island (n = 15) and New Haven, Connecticut (n = 6). Most participants identified as White (57.1%) and gay (52.4%). Over half (52.4%) screened positive for stimulant use disorder. We identified themes in how participants defined, entered, and engaged in substance use treatment. Participants described treatment to include a variety of modalities, including self-help and peer support groups; they defined treatment as an iterative process. Social networks played both a supportive and obstructive role in treatment entry depending on the relationships and approaches of network members. Meanwhile, social connection during treatment could be both therapeutic (reducing isolation) and counterproductive (precipitating cravings to use). Participants generally expressed a desire for harm reduction approaches to treatment over abstinence-only ones. Finally, participants did not find treatment responsive to their needs as MSM. Conclusion: This study highlights key barriers and facilitators to substance use treatment engagement and underscores the urgent need for culturally-responsive treatment programs that employ harm reduction approaches and are tailored to the unique circumstances of MSM who use stimulants.Supplemental data for this article is available online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10826084.2022.2026965.

Barriers and Challenges to Making Referrals for Treatment and Services for Opioid Misuse in Family Planning Settings.

Background: In this opioid overdose epidemic, women are an overlooked group seeing increasing rates of overdose death. Implementation challenges have prevented evidence-based interventions from effectively reaching women who misuse opioids, with gaps in access to effective treatment and services. Family planning clinics could serve as important points of contact for referral to needed treatments and services. The study explores how family planning staff knowledge and attitudes related to opioid misuse serve as potential barriers and challenges in making referrals for evidence-based services and treatments. Methods: In 2018, we conducted a national online survey of family planning staff, assessing knowledge and attitudes of treatments and services for opioid misuse. Results: A total of 691 family planning staff completed the survey. Most respondents agreed that opioid misuse was a major problem in their community (86.0%) and identified challenges in responding to it, including a lack of treatment access (70.3%), the absence of in-house behavioral health staff (67.2%), and unfamiliarity with local treatment providers (54.1%). Respondents reported low levels of acceptability for syringe services programs (46.0%), medications such as methadone and buprenorphine (55.4%), and naloxone to reverse opioid overdose (60.1%). Controlling for other factors, race/ethnicity, urbanicity, workplace role, and substance use training were associated with differences in acceptability. Conclusions: Family planning settings could play a critical role in connecting women who misuse opioids to treatment and services. Strategies are needed to increase the acceptability of evidence-based interventions and the feasibility of having family planning staff play a linkage role.

Development and pilot-testing of a hepatitis C reinfection prevention intervention for patients in treatment for hepatitis C infection.

•We developed a two-session behavioral intervention to prevent HCV reinfection.•The intervention was piloted at an OTP and integrated into HCV treatment.•Baseline data showed limited knowledge & application of safer injection practices.•Implementation barriers included logistics and the lack of financial incentive.•Adaptations addressed barriers, yielding a more feasible and acceptable intervention.

Post-incarceration outcomes for individuals who continued methadone treatment while in Connecticut jails, 2014-2018.

PURPOSE: To assess post-release outcomes associated with continuation of methadone treatment in correctional centers. METHODS: This case-control study of the post-incarceration impact of pilot methadone programs operating in jails in New Haven and Bridgeport, Connecticut, USA was conducted in 2014-18. The study compared non-fatal overdose, fatal overdose, reincarceration, and resumption of methadone in the community experienced by 1564 eligible men, 660 (42.2 %) of whom continued treatment while incarcerated. RESULTS: Continuation of methadone was associated with a significant decrease in non-fatal overdose (OR:0.55; 95 % CI: 0.36, 0.85) and a greater likelihood of resuming methadone treatment in the community post-release (OR:2.56; 95 % CI: 2.07, 3.16). Time to resumption of methadone was shortened by treatment while time to non-fatal overdose was increased. Treatment while incarcerated resulted in a modest but not significant decrease in fatal overdoses and no difference in reincarceration between those who did and did not receive methadone. However, resumption of methadone after release did significantly reduce fatal overdoses (OR = 0.26, 95 % CI: 0.11, 0.62, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Improvements in post-release outcomes of non-fatal overdose and treatment reengagement emphasize the benefits of continuing medication-based treatment for opioid use disorder within the criminal justice system for those receiving it prior to being incarcerated.

Changes in methadone program practices and fatal methadone overdose rates in Connecticut during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) has relaxed restrictions on methadone treatment in the United States. There is concern that the relaxation may increase fatal overdose rates. This study examines opioid treatment program (OTP) changes to methadone treatment during COVID-19 and changes in fatal methadone-involved overdose rates in Connecticut. METHODS: From July 8th to August 18th, 2020, we conducted a comprehensive state-wide survey of all eight OTPs that dispense methadone in Connecticut to examine programmatic changes during COVID-19. We also analyzed state-level data on confirmed accidental opioid-involved deaths to assess if relaxation of take-home dosing restrictions and in-person attendance requirements correlated with increased methadone-involved fatal overdose rates. RESULTS: OTPs reported implementing multiple changes to methadone treatment in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The percent of patients receiving 28-day take-home doses increased from 0.1% to 16.8%, 14-day take-home doses increased from 14.2% to 26.8%, and the percent receiving one or no take-home doses decreased from 37.5% to 9.6%. Monthly or more frequent drug testing decreased from 15% to 4.6% and 75.2% of individual counseling for methadone patients transitioned to telehealth. However, changes to methadone treatment varied considerably by program. OTP providers said restrictions on methadone should be relaxed and increases in take-home dosing as well as telehealth should be continued in non-pandemic situations. Methadone-involved fatalities relative to other opioid-involved fatalities did not increase in Connecticut following changes in OTP practices. CONCLUSIONS: Connecticut OTPs relaxed methadone treatment requirements during COVID-19. Since relaxing restrictions on methadone treatment has not increased fatal overdoses, we recommend that the reductions in-person dosing and attendance requirements implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic should be continued and made permanent.

Adherence to and Retention in Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Among Adolescents and Young Adults.

The volatile opioid epidemic is associated with higher levels of opioid use disorder (OUD) and negative health outcomes in adolescents and young adults. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) demonstrate the best evidence for treating OUD. Adherence to and retention in MOUD, defined as continuous engagement in treatment, among adolescents and young adults, however, is incompletely understood. We examined the state of the literature regarding the association of age with adherence to and retention in MOUD using methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone among persons aged 10-24 years, along with related facilitators and barriers. All studies of MOUD were searched for that examined adherence, retention, or related concepts as an outcome variable and included adolescents or young adults. Search criteria generated 10,229 records; after removing duplicates and screening titles and abstracts, 587 studies were identified for full-text review. Ultimately, 52 articles met inclusion criteria for abstraction and 17 were selected for qualitative coding and analysis. Younger age was consistently associated with shorter retention, although the overall quality of included studies was low. Several factors at the individual, interpersonal, and institutional levels, such as concurrent substance use, MOUD adherence, family conflict, and MOUD dosage and flexibility, appeared to have roles in MOUD retention among adolescents and young adults. Ways MOUD providers can tailor treatment to increase retention of adolescents and young adults are highlighted, as is the need for more research explaining MOUD adherence and retention disparities in this age group.