Medication-Assisted Treatment in Problem-solving Courts: A National Survey of State and Local Court Coordinators.

Problem-solving courts (PSCs) are a critical part of a societal effort to mitigate the opioid epidemic's devastating consequences. This paper reports on a national survey of PSCs (N = 42 state-wide court coordinators; N = 849 local court coordinators) and examines the structural factors that could explain the likelihood of a local PSC authorizing medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and MAT utilization. Results of the analyses indicate that MAT availability at the county level was a significant predictor of the likelihood of local courts authorizing MAT. The court's location in a Medicaid expansion state was also a significant predictor of local courts allowing buprenorphine and methadone, but not naltrexone. Problem-solving courts are in the early stages of supporting the use of medications, even when funding is available through Medicaid expansion policies. Adoption and use of treatment innovations like MAT are affected by coordinators' perceptions of MAT as well as structural factors such as the availability of the medications in the community and funding resources. The study has important implications for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners.

Long-term follow-up of individuals under community supervision who refused rapid HIV testing.

Many criminal justice-involved persons on probation or parole do not receive HIV testing despite being at an increased risk for infection and transmission. Between April, 2011 and May, 2012 in Baltimore, MD and Providence, RI, a two-group randomized controlled trial was conducted in order to examine the uptake of on-site rapid HIV testing compared to off-site referral-based HIV testing at a community clinic. Adults under community supervision were recruited to complete baseline assessments and then offered optional, free rapid-HIV testing. Of the 1263 participants who completed baseline measures, 566 declined HIV testing prior to randomization to the on-site testing at the Probation/Parole office or referral to off-site testing in a community health clinic. Follow-up data from 50 individuals who declined HIV testing were collected from September 2016-June 2017 and are examined in the present study. We describe the long-term outcomes of these 50 individuals in terms of HIV testing, HIV status, and frequencies of drug and sex risk behaviors.

The TCU Drug Screen 5: Identifying Justice-involved Individuals with Substance Use Disorders.

The TCU Drug Screen II, a widely used instrument for identifying substance use problems, was originally developed based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders III-R criteria. In 2013, the American Psychiatric Association revised the criteria and classification scheme for substance use disorders (SUDs) with the publication of the DSM-5. Subsequently, the TCU Drug Screen was modified to reflect the updated DSM-5. The current study examines the concordance of the TCU Drug Screen II and TCU Drug Screen 5 with adult and juvenile justice-involved samples. Both versions were administered to 305 adult male and 310 juvenile male justice-involved clients as part of standard intake procedures. Results revealed a high level of agreement between the two versions; however, the TCU Drug Screen 5 detected significantly more cases of SUDs, the majority of which corresponded to a mild SUD. Results documented appropriate discrimination in meeting diagnostic thresholds among both age groups, with fewer adolescents identified as having a disorder. Overall, the results suggest that the TCU Drug Screen 5 is comparable to the TCU Drug Screen II with the added potential benefit of DSM-5 conformity and severity specifiers.

Effect of Case Management on HIV Outcomes for Community Corrections Population: Results of an 18-Month Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based interventions that engage community-dwelling, justice-involved, people living with HIV (PLWH) in care are urgently needed. Project Bridge, an intensive case management intervention, has demonstrated efficacy for linking PLWH to care transitioning from prison to the community. We assessed whether a modified Project Bridge model was effective for increasing rates of HIV treatment engagement, antiretroviral therapy receipt, and adherence for community-dwelling individuals supervised on probation and parole. SETTING: Baltimore, Maryland. METHODS: In this study, the 18-month outcomes of a randomized controlled trial in which PLWH were also on probation or parole received either Project Bridge (n = 50) or treatment as usual (n = 50) were assessed. HIV treatment engagement (primary outcome), antiretroviral therapy prescription, and adherence (secondary outcomes) are evaluated using the intent-to-treat approach. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in rates of HIV treatment engagement, antiretroviral therapy prescription receipt, or adherence between groups over the 18-month study period. Across groups, participants were 5.6 times more likely to receive HIV care, 5.8 times more likely to receive an antiretroviral therapy prescription, and 4 times more likely to report antiretroviral therapy adherence at each follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Future research is needed to identify potentially less-intensive interventions that target the unique needs of PLWH under community supervision.

A clinical protocol of a comparative effectiveness trial of extended-release naltrexone versus extended-release buprenorphine with individuals leaving jail.

This study is a randomized, open label, controlled trial of extended-release buprenorphine (XR-B; BRIXADI™ formulation) versus extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) in Maryland jails. A 7-site, open-label, equivalence design will randomly assign 240 adults with a history of opioid use disorder (OUD), stratified by gender and jail, who are nearing release to one of two treatment arms: 1) XR-B in jail or 2) XR-NTX in jail, both followed by 6 monthly injections postrelease at a community treatment program. The primary aim is to determine the rate of pharmacotherapy adherence (number of monthly injections received) of XR-B compared to XR-NTX. The proposed study is innovative because it will be the first randomized clinical trial in the U.S. assessing the effectiveness of receiving XR-B vs. XR-NTX in county jails. The public health impact of the study will be highly significant and far-reaching because most individuals with OUD do not receive treatment while incarcerated, thereby substantially raising their likelihood of relapse to drug use, overdose death, and re-incarceration. Understanding how to expand acceptance of medications for OUD in jails, particularly extended-release medications, and supporting treatment engagement and medication adherence in transition to the community, has far-reaching implications for improving treatment access and success in this population.

A randomized controlled trial of buprenorphine for probationers and parolees: Bridging the gap into treatment.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine can be effective in a variety of community substance use treatment settings outside of methadone programs, including outpatient programs and medical practices. In these settings, it has been found to be effective in reducing opioid use and retaining patients in treatment. Despite its effectiveness and safety, it is rarely provided to individuals with opioid use disorders in probation and parole settings. METHODS: Male and female individuals under probation or parole supervision (N = 320) with histories of opioid use disorder will be enrolled in this randomized controlled trial. Participants will be randomized to one of two study arms: Buprenorphine Bridge Treatment (BBT): Participants will begin buprenorphine using the MedicaSafe dispensing device immediately after an on-site intake at a community supervision office and continue such treatment until they are transitioned to a community program; or Treatment as Usual (TAU): Participants will receive a referral to buprenorphine pharmacotherapy treatment in the community. Treatment outcomes will be: (a) illicit opioid oral saliva drug test results; and (b) treatment adherence (i. entered community based treatment; ii. number of days receiving opioid treatment). RESULTS: We describe the background and rationale for the study, its aims, hypotheses, and study design. CONCLUSIONS: If shown to increase compliance rates with conditions of probation and parole, buprenorphine treatment co-located at community supervision field offices could have a major impact on delivery of buprenorphine treatment to the criminal justice population. The public health impact of the proposed study would be widespread because this intervention could be implemented throughout areas of the US.

Expanding low-threshold buprenorphine to justice-involved individuals through mobile treatment: Addressing a critical care gap.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly prevalent among justice-involved individuals. While risk for overdose and other adverse consequences of opioid use are heightened among this population, most justice-involved individuals and other high-risk groups experience multiple barriers to engagement in opioid agonist treatment. METHODS: This paper describes the development of Project Connections at Re-Entry (PCARE), a low-threshold buprenorphine treatment program that engages vulnerable patients in care through a mobile van parked directly outside the Baltimore City Jail. Patients are referred by jail staff or can walk in from the street. The clinical team includes an experienced primary care physician who prescribes buprenorphine, a nurse, and a peer recovery coach. The team initiates treatment for those with OUD and refers those with other needs to appropriate providers. Once stabilized, patients are transitioned to longer-term treatment programs or primary care for buprenorphine maintenance. This paper describes the process of developing this program, patient characteristics and initial outcomes for the first year of the program, and implications for public health practice. RESULTS: From November 15, 2017 through November 30, 2018, 220 people inquired about treatment services and completed an intake interview, and 190 began treatment with a buprenorphine/naloxone prescription. Those who initiated buprenorphine were primarily male (80.1%), African American (85.1%), had a mean age of 44.1 (SD = 12.2), and a mean of 24.0 (SD = 13.6) years of opioid use. The majority of patients (94.4%) had previous criminal justice involvement, were unemployed (72.9%) and were unstably housed (70.8%). Over a third (32.1%) of patients had previously overdosed. Of those who began treatment, 67.9% returned for a second visit or more, and 31.6% percent were still involved in treatment after 30 days. Of those who initiated care, 20.5% have been transferred to continue buprenorphine treatment at a partnering site. CONCLUSIONS: The PCARE program illustrates the potential for low-threshold buprenorphine treatment to engage populations who are justice-involved and largely disconnected from care. While more work is needed to improve treatment retention among vulnerable patients and engaging persons in care directly after release from detention, offering on-demand, flexible and de-stigmatizing treatment may serve as a first point to connect high-risk populations with the healthcare system and interventions that reduce risk for overdose and related harms.

Longitudinal analysis of HIV-risk behaviors of participants in a randomized trial of prison-initiated buprenorphine.

BACKGROUND: It has been estimated that approximately 15% of people who are incarcerated in the US have histories of opioid use disorder. Relapse to opioid use after release from prison poses a serious risk of HIV infection. Prison-initiated buprenorphine may help to reduce HIV infection given the association between opioid use and HIV-risk behaviors. METHODS: The present study is a secondary analysis of longitudinal data gathered from a randomized controlled trial of buprenorphine-naloxone for people who were incarcerated (N = 211) between 2008 and 2012. It compares the impact of assignment to initiate buprenorphine in prison (N = 106 randomized, N = 104 analyzed) versus in the community (N = 107 randomized, N = 107 analyzed) and whether or not participants entered community treatment on the frequency of HIV-risk behaviors in the 12 months following release from prison. Data were analyzed hierarchically and for each outcome variable, a multilevel, over-dispersed Poisson model was fit to the data. Outcome variables were the number of times the following behaviors occurred in the last 30 days: (1) having sex without a condom (2) injecting drugs (3) using unsterilized needles, and (4) sharing injection paraphernalia. RESULTS: Participants assigned to begin buprenorphine in the community experienced a greater decrease in injection drug use over time compared to participants assigned to begin buprenorphine in prison. There were no significant associations between treatment assignment or community treatment entry and instances of having sex without a condom, sharing injection paraphernalia, or using unsterilized needles. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the present study did not find support for the initiation of buprenorphine in prison (as opposed to the community) as a means to reduce incidences of HIV-risk behaviors. Avenues for future research in the nexus of HIV-risk reduction, criminal justice, and pharmacotherapy are discussed. Trial registration This study was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Buprenorphine for Prisoners (PI: Kinlock; R01DA021579). ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00574067.

StaySafe: A self-administered android tablet application for helping individuals on probation make better decisions pertaining to health risk behaviors.

This paper describes the development and protocol for feasibility and efficacy testing of a risk reduction intervention designed to improve behavioral health outcomes among drug offenders on probation under community supervision or in residential substance abuse treatment centers. StaySafe is a self-administered tablet-based intervention for teaching better decision-making skills regarding health risk behaviors, especially those involving HIV risks. We are using pre/post, experimental/control group randomized clinical trial (RCT) in both community and residential probation settings with goals to 1) assess the feasibility and acceptance of StaySafe by examining participation rates and satisfaction measures, and 2) examine the impact of StaySafe on decision-making skills, confidence and motivation to avoid sex and drug risks, willingness to discuss health risks and concerns with helpful others, and engagement in health risk behaviors. StaySafe consists of 12 brief sessions and utilizes an evidence-based decision-making schema, called WORKIT, which guides participants through steps for identifying the problem and options, evaluating the options and making a decision about which option to carry out. Multiple sessions of StaySafe provide a practice effect so that the WORKIT steps become easily accessible to participants when making decisions. Three of the sessions provide participants a choice of activities designed to provide additional information about HIV and reinforce lessons learned during the WORKIT sessions. Preliminary data demonstrate feasibility and high levels of satisfaction with StaySafe.

Initiating buprenorphine treatment prior to versus after release from prison: Arrest outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This secondary analysis of a randomized trial examines the association between initiation of buprenorphine treatment prior to, versus post-release, and rearrests during the 12-months following release. METHODS: Official rearrest data (N = 199) for the 12-months post-release were examined. Four outcomes were measured: (1) rearrested (yes/no), (2) time to rearrest, (3) number of rearrests, and (4) severity of charges (less severe vs. severe). RESULTS: A minority (43.1%) of the sample were rearrested (N = 91). There were no significant differences between study conditions in the proportion of rearrested participants [P = 0.28] nor in the mean number of arrests [P  = 0.15]. Likewise, the condition was not a significant predictor of the hazard of rearrest [p = 0.10]. The mean number of days until rearrest for the in prison vs. post-release buprenorphine conditions were not significantly different (205.8 days (SD  = 104.6) vs. 170.8 days (SD  = 113.1), respectively; P  = 0.13]. Treatment condition was not a significant predictor of the likelihood of rearrest for a severe crime compared to a less severe crime [P  = 0.09]. CONCLUSION: Despite the parent study finding of higher rates of post-release drug treatment entry in the group assigned to start buprenorphine treatment prior to, compared to post-release, there were no significant differences in the proportion of individuals arrested, the mean number of arrests, the time to first arrest, or the severity of their charges.