Buprenorphine Prescribing and Challenges Faced Among National Health Service Corps Clinicians.

Importance: The National Health Service Corps (NHSC) Loan Repayment Program (LRP) expansion in fiscal year (FY) 2019 intended to improve access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) by adding more clinicians who could prescribe buprenorphine. However, some clinicians still face barriers to prescribing, which may vary between rural and nonrural areas. Objective: To examine the growth in buprenorphine prescribing by NHSC clinicians for Medicaid beneficiaries during the NHSC LRP expansion and describe the challenges to prescribing that persist in rural and nonrural areas. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed preexpansion and postexpansion Medicaid claims data to evaluate the percentage of prescriptions of buprenorphine filled during FY 2017 through 2021. This study also analyzed challenges and barriers to prescribing MOUD between rural and urban areas, using results from annual surveys conducted with NHSC clinicians and sites from FY 2019 through FY 2021. Exposure: Prescribing of buprenorphine by NHSC clinicians. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the percentage and number of Medicaid beneficiaries with opioid use disorder (OUD) who filled a prescription for buprenorphine before and after the LRP expansion and the challenges NHSC clinicians and sites faced in providing substance use disorder and OUD services. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: During FYs 2017 through 2021, 7828 NHSC clinicians prescribed buprenorphine (standard LRP: mean [SD] age, 38.1 [8.4] years and 4807 females [78.9%]; expansion LRPs: mean [SD] age, 39.4 [8.1] years and 1307 females [75.0%]). A total of 3297 NHSC clinicians and 4732 NHSC sites responded to at least 1 survey question to the 3 surveys. The overall percentage of Medicaid beneficiaries with OUD who filled a prescription for buprenorphine during the first 2.5 years post expansion increased significantly from 18.9% before to 43.7% after expansion (an increase of 123 422 beneficiaries; P < .001). The percentage more than doubled among beneficiaries living in areas with a high Social Vulnerability Index score (from 17.0% to 36.7%; an increase of 31 964) and among beneficiaries living in rural areas (from 20.8% to 55.7%; an increase of 45 523). However, 773 of 2140 clinicians (36.1%; 95% CI, 33.6%-38.6%) reported a lack of mental health services to complement medication for OUD treatment, and 290 of 1032 clinicians (28.1%; 95% CI, 24.7%-31.7%) reported that they did not prescribe buprenorphine due to a lack of supervision, mentorship, or peer consultation. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that although the X-waiver requirement has been removed and Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration guidelines encourage all eligible clinicians to screen and offer patients with OUD buprenorphine, as permissible by state law, more trained health care workers and improved care coordination for counseling and referral services are needed to support comprehensive OUD treatment.

Barriers to Buprenorphine Dispensing by Medicaid-Participating Community Retail Pharmacies.

Importance: Controlled substances have regulatory requirements under the US Federal Controlled Substance Act that must be met before pharmacies can stock and dispense them. However, emerging evidence suggests there are pharmacy-level barriers in access to buprenorphine for treatment for opioid use disorder even among pharmacies that dispense other opioids. Objective: To estimate the proportion of Medicaid-participating community retail pharmacies that dispense buprenorphine, out of Medicaid-participating community retail pharmacies that dispense other opioids and assess if the proportion dispensing buprenorphine varies by Medicaid patient volume or rural-urban location. Design, Setting, and Participants: This serial cross-sectional study included Medicaid pharmacy claims (2016-2019) data from 6 states (Kentucky, Maine, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia) participating in the Medicaid Outcomes Distributed Research Network (MODRN). Community retail pharmacies serving Medicaid-enrolled patients were included, mail-order pharmacies were excluded. Analyses were conducted from September 2022 to August 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of pharmacies dispensing buprenorphine approved for opioid use disorder among pharmacies dispensing an opioid analgesic or buprenorphine prescription to at least 1 Medicaid enrollee in each state. Pharmacies were categorized by median Medicaid patient volume (by state and year) and rurality (urban vs rural location according to zip code). Results: In 2016, 72.0% (95% CI, 70.9%-73.0%) of the 7038 pharmacies that dispensed opioids also dispensed buprenorphine to Medicaid enrollees, increasing to 80.4% (95% CI, 79.5%-81.3%) of 7437 pharmacies in 2019. States varied in the percent of pharmacies dispensing buprenorphine in Medicaid (range, 73.8%-96.4%), with significant differences between several states found in 2019 (χ2 P < .05), when states were most similar in the percent of pharmacies dispensing buprenorphine. A lower percent of pharmacies with Medicaid patient volume below the median dispensed buprenorphine (69.1% vs 91.7% in 2019), compared with pharmacies with above-median patient volume (χ2 P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this serial cross-sectional study of Medicaid-participating pharmacies, buprenorphine was not accessible in up to 20% of community retail pharmacies, presenting pharmacy-level barriers to patients with Medicaid seeking buprenorphine treatment. That some pharmacies dispensed opioid analgesics but not buprenorphine suggests that factors other than compliance with the Controlled Substance Act influence pharmacy dispensing decisions.

How Do I Manage Acute Pain for Patients Prescribed Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder?

AbstractA growing number of patients are prescribed buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD). Consequently, clinicians are likely to encounter hospitalized patients with acute surgical or nonsurgical pain who are also prescribed buprenorphine for OUD. This scenario evokes the clinical question of how to adequately manage acute pain among hospitalized patients receiving buprenorphine for OUD. This article reviews buprenorphine's pharmacology, describes various buprenorphine products used to treat pain and OUD, and provides pain management recommendations for patients prescribed buprenorphine in the setting of acute surgical and nonsurgical pain.

Pharmacist-prescriber collaborative models of care for opioid use disorder: an overview of recent research.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Collaborative models of care where pharmacists work alongside physicians have been developed for a range of physical health conditions, with benefits including improved patient outcomes and increased access to ongoing care. Opioid agonist treatment (methadone and buprenorphine) is a clinically effective and cost-effective treatment for opioid use disorder that is under-utilized in many countries due to a shortage of prescribers. In recent years, there has been increased interest in the development of collaborative models that utilize pharmacists to overcome barriers to treatment. In this article, we present a narrative review to synthesise recent work in this rapidly developing area. RECENT FINDINGS: Two key aspects of opioid agonist treatment were identified: Collaborative models have utilized pharmacists to facilitate buprenorphine induction, and collaborative models provide increased capacity for delivering ongoing care in a variety of settings and patient groups where prescriber access is limited. Pharmacists have undertaken direct patient care responsibilities with varying degrees of autonomy, with benefits including a reduction in prescriber workload, and improvements in treatment retention and continuity of care. SUMMARY: Collaborative models in which pharmacists are responsible for buprenorphine induction and ongoing management with methadone and buprenorphine have been shown to reduce demands on prescribers while improving or maintaining patient outcomes, and appear feasible and acceptable in a wide range of outpatient settings.

A qualitative study of experiences with physical activity among people receiving opioid agonist therapy.

BACKGROUND: Physical or mental health comorbidities are common among people with substance use disorders undergoing opioid agonist therapy. As both a preventive and treatment strategy, exercise offers various health benefits for several conditions. Exercise interventions to people with substance use disorders receiving opioid agonist therapy are limited. This study aims to explore experiences with physical activity, perceived barriers, and facilitators among people receiving opioid agonist therapy. METHOD: Fourteen qualitative interviews were conducted with individuals receiving opioid agonist therapy in outpatient clinics in Western Norway. RESULTS: Most were males in the age range 30 to 60 years. Participants had diverse and long-term substance use histories, and most received buprenorphine-based opioid agonist therapy. The identified themes were (1) Physical limitations: Participants experienced health-related problems like breathing difficulties, pain, and reduced physical function. (2) Social dynamics: Social support was essential for participating in physical activities and many argued for group exercises, but some were concerned about the possibility of meeting persons influenced by substances in a group setting, fearing temptations to use substances. (3) Shift in focus: As participants felt the weight of the health burden, their preference for activities shifted from sports aiming for "adrenaline" to a health promoting focus. (4) COVID-19's impact on exercise: because of the pandemic, group activities were suspended, and participants described it as challenging to resume. (5) Implementation preferences in clinics: Not interfering with opioid medication routines was reported to be essential. CONCLUSION: This study offers valuable insights for the development of customized exercise interventions aimed at enhancing the health and well-being of patients undergoing opioid agonist therapy. These findings underscore the significance of addressing social dynamics, overcoming physical limitations, and implementing a practical and effective exercise regimen.

Managing emergency department patients with opioid use disorder.

As the United States continues to grapple with the opioid crisis, emergency clinicians are on the front lines of managing patients with opioid use disorder. This issue reviews tools and best practices in emergency department management of patients with opioid overdose and opioid withdrawal, and how substance use history will inform treatment planning and disposition. As growing evidence shows that medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD)- buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone-can have lasting impacts on patients' addiction recovery, strategies for assessing patient readiness for MOUD and overcoming barriers to emergency department initiation of these medications are reviewed. Newer approaches to buprenorphine dosing (high-dose, low-dose, home induction, and long-acting injectable dosing) are also reviewed.

Using quality improvement approaches to increase emergency department provider engagement in research participant enrollment during COVID-19 and opioid overdose public health emergencies.

PURPOSE: We utilized quality improvement (QI) approaches to increase emergency department (ED) provider engagement with research participant enrollment during the opioid crisis and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The context of this work is the Evaluating Microdosing in the Emergency Department (EMED) study, a randomized trial offering buprenorphine/naloxone to ED patients through randomization to standard or microdosing induction. Engaging providers is crucial for participant recruitment to our study. Anticipating challenges sustaining long-term engagement after a 63% decline in provider referrals four months into enrollments, we applied Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles to develop and implement an engagement strategy to increase and sustain provider engagement by 50% from baseline within 9 months. METHODS: Our engagement strategy was centered on Coffee Carts rounds: 5-min study-related educational presentations for providers on shift; and a secondary initiative, a Suboxone Champions program, to engage interested providers as study-related peer educators. We used provider referrals to our team as a proxy for study engagement and report the percent change in mean weekly referrals across two PDSA cycles relative to our established referral baseline. RESULTS: A QI approach afforded real-time review of interventions based on research and provider priorities, increasing engagement via mean weekly provider referrals by 14.5% and 49% across two PDSA cycles relative to baseline, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our Coffee Carts and Suboxone Champions program are efficient, low-barrier, educational initiatives to convey study-related information to providers. This work supported our efforts to maximally engage providers, minimize burden, and provide life-saving buprenorphine/naloxone to patients at risk of fatal overdose.

RéSUMé: BUT: Nous avons utilisé des approches d'amélioration de la qualité (AQ) pour accroître l'engagement des fournisseurs des services d'urgence (SU) avec l'inscription des participants à la recherche pendant la crise des opioïdes et la pandémie de maladie à coronavirus (COVID-19). Le contexte de ce travail est l'étude Evaluating Microdosing in the Emergency Department (EMED), un essai randomisé offrant de la buprénorphine/naloxone aux patients aux urgences par randomisation à l'induction standard ou au microdosage. L'engagement des fournisseurs est crucial pour le recrutement des participants à notre étude. En anticipant les difficultés à maintenir un engagement à long terme après une baisse de 63 % des recommandations de fournisseurs quatre mois après les inscriptions, nous avons appliqué le Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles d'élaboration et de mise en œuvre d'une stratégie d'engagement visant à accroître et à maintenir l'engagement des fournisseurs de 50 % par rapport au niveau de référence dans les neuf mois. MéTHODES: Notre stratégie de mobilisation était axée sur les tournées de Coffee Carts : des présentations éducatives de cinq minutes sur l'étude pour les fournisseurs sur le quart de travail; et une initiative secondaire, un programme Suboxone Champions, pour mobiliser les fournisseurs intéressés en tant que pairs éducateurs liés à l'étude. Nous avons utilisé les recommandations des fournisseurs à notre équipe comme indicateur de la participation à l'étude et nous avons signalé le pourcentage de changement dans les recommandations hebdomadaires moyennes pour deux cycles PDSA par rapport à notre base de référence établie. RéSULTATS: Une approche d'AQ a permis d'examiner en temps réel les interventions en fonction des priorités de la recherche et des fournisseurs, ce qui a augmenté l'engagement par l'intermédiaire des recommandations hebdomadaires moyennes des fournisseurs de 14,5 % et de 49 % au cours de deux cycles de PDSA par rapport au niveau de référence, respectivement. CONCLUSION: Notre programme Coffee Carts and Suboxone Champions est une initiative éducative efficace et peu contraignante qui permet de transmettre aux fournisseurs des renseignements sur les études. Ce travail a appuyé nos efforts visant à mobiliser au maximum les fournisseurs, à réduire au minimum le fardeau et à fournir de la buprénorphine/naloxone vitale aux patients à risque de surdose mortelle.

Addressing System and Clinician Barriers to Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine: An Evaluation of Post-intervention Physician Outcomes.

Introduction: Emergency departments (ED) are in the unique position to initiate buprenorphine, an evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, barriers at the system and clinician level limit its use. We describe a series of interventions that address these barriers to ED-initiated buprenorphine in one urban ED. We compare post-intervention physician outcomes between the study site and two affiliated sites without the interventions. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted at three affiliated urban EDs where the intervention site implemented OUD-related electronic note templates, clinical protocols, a peer navigation program, education, and reminders. Post-intervention, we administered an anonymous, online survey to physicians at all three sites. Survey domains included demographics, buprenorphine experience and knowledge, comfort with addressing OUD, and attitudes toward OUD treatment. Physician outcomes were compared between the intervention site and the control sites with bivariate tests. We used logistic regression controlling for significant demographic differences to compare physicians' buprenorphine experience. Results: Of 113 (51%) eligible physicians, 58 completed the survey: 27 from the intervention site, and 31 from the control sites. Physicians at the intervention site were more likely to spend <75% of their work week in clinical practice and to be in medical practice for <7 years. Buprenorphine knowledge (including status of buprenorphine prescribing waiver), comfort with addressing OUD, and attitudes toward OUD treatment did not differ significantly between the sites. Physicians were 4.5 times more likely to have administered buprenorphine at the intervention site (odds ratio [OR] 4.5, 95% confidence interval 1.4-14.4, P = 0.01), which remained significant after adjusting for clinical time and years in practice, (OR 3.5 and 4.6, respectively). Conclusion: Physicians exposed to interventions addressing system- and clinician-level implementation barriers were at least three times as likely to have administered buprenorphine in the ED. Physicians' buprenorphine knowledge, comfort with addressing and attitudes toward OUD treatment did not differ significantly between sites. Our findings suggest that ED-initiated buprenorphine can be facilitated by addressing implementation barriers, while physician knowledge, comfort, and attitudes may be harder to improve.

LatinX harm reduction capital, medication for opioid use disorder, and nonfatal overdose: A structural equation model analysis among people who use drugs in Massachusetts.

BACKGROUND: We introduce the concept of harm reduction capital (HRCap) as the combination of knowledge, resources, and skills related to substance use risk reduction, which we hypothesize to predict MOUD use and opioid overdose. In this study, we explored the interrelationships between ethnicity, HRCap, nonfatal overdose, and MOUD use among PWUD. METHODS: Between 2017 and 2019, people who currently or in the past used opioids and who lived in Massachusetts completed a one-time survey on substance use history, treatment experiences, and use of harm reduction services. We fit first-order measurement constructs for positive and negative HRCap (facilitators and barriers). We used generalized structural equation models to examine the inter-relationships of the latent constructs with LatinX self-identification, past year overdose, and current use of MOUD. RESULTS: HRCap barriers were positively associated with past-year overdose (b=2.6, p<0.05), and LatinX self-identification was inversely associated with HRCap facilitators (b=-0.49, p<0.05). There was no association between overdose in the past year and the current use of MOUD. LatinX self-identification was positively associated with last year methadone treatment (b=0.89, p<0.05) but negatively associated with last year buprenorphine treatment (b=-0.68, p<0.07). Latinx PWUD reported lower positive HRCap than white non-LatinX PWUD and had differential utilization of MOUD. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that a recent overdose was not associated with the current use of MOUD, highlighting a severe gap in treatment utilization among individuals at the highest risk. The concept of HRCap and its use in the model highlight substance use treatment differences, opportunities for intervention, and empowerment.

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.

Changes in Buprenorphine Prescribing in Community Health Centers.

This cohort study characterizes changes in buprenorphine prescribing among community health center clinicians between 2016 and 2021.

Concomitant use of pre-emptive analgesia with local and general anesthesia in rat uterine pain surgical model.

Preemptive analgesia is used for postoperative pain management, providing pain relief with few adverse effects. In this study, the effect of a preemptive regime on rat behavior and c-fos expression in the spinal cord of the uterine surgical pain model was evaluated. It was a lab-based experimental study in which 60 female Sprague-Dawley rats; eight to 10 weeks old, weighing 150-300 gm were used. The rats were divided into two main groups: (i) superficial pain group (SG) (with skin incision only), (ii) deep pain group (with skin and uterine incisions). Each group was further divided into three subgroups based on the type of preemptive analgesia administered i.e., "tramadol, buprenorphine, and saline subgroups." Pain behavior was evaluated using the "Rat Grimace Scale" (RGS) at 2, 4, 6, 9 and 24 h post-surgery. Additionally, c-fos immunohistochemistry was performed on sections from spinal dorsal horn (T12-L2), and its expression was evaluated using optical density and mean cell count 2 hours postoperatively. Significant reduction in the RGS was noted in both the superficial and deep pain groups within the tramadol and buprenorphine subgroups when compared to the saline subgroup (p ≤ .05). There was a significant decrease in c-fos expression both in terms of number of c-fos positive cells and the optical density across the superficial laminae and lamina X of the spinal dorsal horn in both SD and DG (p ≤ .05). In contrast, the saline group exhibited c-fos expression primarily in laminae I-II and III-IV for both superficial and deep pain groups and lamina X in the deep pain group only (p ≤ .05). Hence, a preemptive regimen results in significant suppression of both superficial and deep components of pain transmission. These findings provide compelling evidence of the analgesic efficacy of preemptive treatment in alleviating pain response associated with uterine surgery.

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.

Association of buprenorphine retention and subsequent adverse outcomes following non-fatal overdose: An analysis using statewide linked Maryland databases.

INTRODUCTION: Patients receiving buprenorphine after a non-fatal overdose have lower risk of future nonfatal or fatal overdose, but less is known about the relationship between buprenorphine retention and the risk of adverse outcomes in the post-overdose year. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between the total number of months with an active buprenorphine prescription (retention) and the odds of an adverse outcome within the 12 months following an index non-fatal overdose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied a cohort of people with an index non-fatal opioid overdose in Maryland between July 2016 and December 2020 and at least one filled buprenorphine prescription in the 12-month post-overdose observation period. We used individually linked Maryland prescription drug and hospital admissions data. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine buprenorphine retention and associated odds of experiencing a second non-fatal overdose, all-cause emergency department visits, and all-cause hospitalizations. RESULTS: Of 5439 people, 25% (n=1360) experienced a second non-fatal overdose, 78% had an (n=4225) emergency department visit, and 37% (n=2032) were hospitalized. With each additional month of buprenorphine, the odds of experiencing another non-fatal overdose decreased by 4.7%, all-cause emergency department visits by 5.3%, and all-cause hospitalization decreased by 3.9% (p<.0001, respectively). Buprenorphine retention for at least nine months was a critical threshold for reducing overdose risk versus shorter buprenorphine retention. CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine retention following an index non-fatal overdose event significantly decreases the risk of future overdose, emergency department use, and hospitalization even among people already on buprenorphine.

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.

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.

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.