Medications for Alcohol Use Disorder: Rates and Predictors of Prescription Order and Fill in Outpatient Settings.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use disorders (AUD) are prevalent and responsible for substantial morbidity and mortality; yet efficacious treatments are underused. Previous studies have identified demographic and clinical predictors of medication fills, yet these studies typically do not include patients who were prescribed a medication but did not fill it. OBJECTIVES: To examine rates of and factors associated with prescription order and prescription fill for medications for AUD (MAUD) among individuals diagnosed with AUD in outpatient settings. DESIGN: In a cross-sectional analysis, we used multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with prescription order and fill. PATIENTS: We used data from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse that linked 2016-2021 de-identified claims and electronic health record (EHR) data, allowing us to observe prescription orders and whether they were filled. We identified 14,674 patients aged ≥ 18 who had an index outpatient encounter with an AUD diagnosis in the EHR. KEY MEASURES: We computed the proportion for whom a MAUD prescription was ordered within 1 year of index visit, and for whom one was filled within 30 days of the order. KEY RESULTS: 5.8% of the sample had a MAUD prescription order within 1 year of their index visit. Among those with an order, 87% filled their MAUD prescription within 30 days of receipt (i.e., 5.1% of full sample). After multivariable adjustment, receipt of a MAUD prescription order was more likely for patients who were female (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) [95%CI] = 1.44 [1.24-1.67]), or had moderate or severe AUD (1.74 [1.50-2.01]). Patients receiving an order were more likely to fill it if they had a comorbid mental disorder (1.64 [1.09-2.49]). CONCLUSIONS: The low rate of prescription orders was notable. Low use of MAUD appears to result chiefly from prescription order decisions, rather than from prescription fill decisions made by patients.

Simultaneous Cannabis and Alcohol Use among Medical Cannabis Patients.

Background: During the past two decades of cannabis legalization, the prevalence of medical cannabis (MC) use has increased and there has also been an upward trend in alcohol consumption. As less restricted cannabis laws generate more adult cannabis users, there is concern that more individuals may be simultaneously using medical cannabis with alcohol. A few studies have examined simultaneous use of medical cannabis with alcohol, but none of those studies also assessed patients' current or previous non-medical cannabis use. This paper explores simultaneous alcohol and medical cannabis use among medical cannabis patients with a specific focus on previous history of cannabis use and current non-medical cannabis use. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of MC patients (N = 319) from four dispensaries located in New York. Bivariate chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression are used to estimate the extent to which sociodemographic and other factors were associated with simultaneous use. Results: Approximately 29% of the sample engaged in simultaneous use and a large share of these users report previous (44%) or current (66%) use of cannabis for non-medical purposes. MC patients who either previously or currently use cannabis non-medicinally, men, and patients using MC to treat a pain-related condition, were significantly more likely to report simultaneous alcohol/MC use. Conclusions: Findings indicate that there may be differential risks related to alcohol/MC use, which should be considered by cannabis regulatory policies and prevention/treatment programs. If patients are using cannabis and/or alcohol to manage pain, clinicians should screen for both alcohol and cannabis use risk factors.

Prescribing Medications for Alcohol Use Disorder: A Qualitative Study of Primary Care Physician Decision Making.

PURPOSE: Over 29 million Americans have alcohol use disorder (AUD). Though there are effective medications for AUD (MAUD) that can be prescribed within primary care, they are underutilized. We aimed to explore how primary care physicians familiar with MAUD make prescribing decisions and to identify reasons for underuse of MAUD within primary care. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 19 primary care physicians recruited from a large online database of medical professionals. Physicians had to have started a patient on MAUD within the last 6 months in an outpatient setting. Inductive and deductive thematic analysis was informed by the theory of planned behavior. RESULTS: Physicians endorsed that it is challenging to prescribe MAUD due to several reasons, including: (1) somewhat negative personal beliefs about medication effectiveness and likelihood of patient adherence; (2) competing demands in primary care that make MAUD a lower priority; and, (3) few positive subjective norms around prescribing. To make MAUD prescribing a smaller component of their practice, physicians reported applying various rules of thumb to select patients for MAUD. These included recommending MAUD to the patients who seemed the most motivated to reduce drinking, those with the most severe AUD, and those who were also receiving other treatments for AUD. CONCLUSIONS: There is a challenging implementation context for MAUD due to competing demands within primary care. Future research should explore which strategies for identifying a subset of patients for MAUD are the most appropriate and most likely to improve population health and health equity.

Changes in Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Use of Mental Health Services under the Affordable Care Act: Evidence from California.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) aimed to expand mental health service use in the US, by expanding access to health insurance. However, the gap in mental health utilization by race and ethnicity is pronounced: members of racial and ethnic minoritized groups remain less likely to use mental health services than non-Hispanic White individuals even after the ACA. AIMS OF THE STUDY: This study assessed the effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on mental health services use in one large state (California), and whether that effect differed among racial and ethnic groups. Also, it tested for change in racial and ethnic disparities after the implementation of the ACA, using four measures of mental health care. METHODS: Using pooled California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) data from 2011-2018, logistic regression and Generalized Linear Models (GLM) were estimated. Disparities were defined using the Institute of Medicine (IOM) definition. Primary outcomes were any mental health care in primary settings; in specialty settings, any prescription medication for mental health problems, and number of annual visits to mental health services. RESULTS: Findings suggested that the change in Hispanic-non-Hispanic White disparities in prescription medication use under the ACA was statistically significant, narrowing the gap by 7.23 percentage points (p<.05). However, the disparity in other measures was not significantly reduced. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that the magnitude of the increase in primary and specialty mental health services among racial and ethnic minorities was not large enough to significantly reduce racial and ethnic disparities. One possible explanation is that non-financial factors played a role, such as language barriers, attitudinal barriers from home culture norms, and systemic barriers due to mental health professional shortages and a limited number of mental health care providers of color. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: Integrated approaches that coordinate specialty and primary care mental health services may be needed to promote mental healthcare access for members of racial and ethnic minoritized groups. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Federal and state policies aiming to improve mental health services use have historically given more weight to financial determinants, but this has not been enough to significantly reduce racial/ethnic disparities. Thus, policies should pay more attention to non-financial determinants. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Assessing underlying mechanisms of non-financial factors that moderate the effectiveness of the ACA is a worthwhile goal for future research. Future studies should examine the extent to which non-financial factors intervene in the relationship between the implementation of the ACA and mental health services use.

Financial Sustainability of Novel Delivery Models in Behavioral Health Treatment.

BACKGROUND: In the US, much of the research into new intervention and delivery models for behavioral health care is funded by research institutes and foundations, typically through grants to develop and test the new interventions. The original grant funding is typically time-limited. This implies that eventually communities, clinicians, and others must find resources to replace the grant funding -otherwise the innovation will not be adopted. Diffusion is challenged by the continued dominance in the US of fee-for-service reimbursement, especially for behavioral health care. AIMS: To understand the financial challenges to disseminating innovative behavioral health delivery models posed by fee-for-service reimbursement, and to explore alternative payment models that promise to accelerate adoption by better addressing need for flexibility and sustainability. METHODS: We review US experience with three specific novel delivery models that emerged in recent years. The models are: collaborative care model for depression (CoCM), outpatient based opioid treatment (OBOT), and the certified community behavioral health clinic (CCBHC) model. These examples were selected as illustrating some common themes and some different issues affecting diffusion. For each model, we discuss its core components; evidence on its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; how its dissemination was funded; how providers are paid; and what has been the uptake so far. RESULTS: The collaborative care model has existed for longest, but has been slow to disseminate, due in part to a lack of billing codes for key components until recently. The OBOT model faced that problem, and also (until recently) a regulatory requirement requiring physicians to obtain federal waivers in order to prescribe buprenorphine. Similarly, the CCBHC model includes previously nonbillable services, but it appears to be diffusing more successfully than some other innovations, due in part to the approach taken by funders. DISCUSSION: A common challenge for all three models has been their inclusion of services that were not (initially) reimbursable in a fee-for-service system. However, even establishing new procedure codes may not be enough to give providers the flexibility needed to implement these models, unless payers also implement alternative payment models. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: For providers who receive time-limited grant funding to implement these novel delivery models, one key lesson is the need to start early on planning how services will be sustained after the grant ends. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: For research funders (e.g., federal agencies), it is clearly important to speed up the process of obtaining coverage for each novel delivery model, including the development of new billable service codes, and to plan for this as early as possible. Funders also need to collaborate with providers early in the grant period on sustainability planning for the post-grant environment. For payers, a key lesson is the need to fold novel models into stable existing funding streams such as Medicaid and commercial insurance coverage, rather than leaving them at the mercy of revolving time-limited grants, and to provide pathways for contracting for innovations under new payment models. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: For researchers, a key recommendation would be to pay greater attention to the payment environment when designing new delivery models and interventions.

Psychometric Performance of the SF-6D Quality of Life Measure in an Outpatient Population with Bipolar Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder is among the top 10 causes of disability worldwide. The Short-Form Six-Dimension (SF-6D) is a frequently used measure of preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQOL). However, this measure's psychometric performance has not been tested in outpatient patients with bipolar disorder. AIMS OF THE STUDY: This study assessed the psychometric properties of the SF-6D, including convergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness. METHODS: We examined convergent validity between the SF-6D and four condition-specific measures of functioning (LIFE-RIFT), life satisfaction (QLESQ), depressive symptoms (MADRS), and manic symptoms (YMRS). We used known-groups validity tests to compare the SF-6D health utility values estimated for patients in different clinical states, including depression, mania, hypomania, and recovered. We assessed the responsiveness of the SF-6D by comparing the sensitivity of the SF-6D utility values to longitudinal changes in the four condition-specific measures during the same period of time. We conducted all analyses using data from 2,627 participants in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) clinical trial. RESULTS: The SF-6D demonstrated moderate (0.3-0.7) convergence with the LIFE-RIFT, QLESQ, and MADRS measures. Convergence with the manic symptoms measure (YMRS) was weak (<0.3). For known-groups validity, the SF-6D distinguished the recovered state from the three symptomatic clinical states. For responsiveness, the measure did not show floor or ceiling effects. The SF-6D utility value increased when mental health improved, with a small ES of 0.3 over the 1-year period, which was comparable to the four condition-specific measures. DISCUSSION: The SF-6D demonstrated moderate convergent validity, moderate responsiveness, and it can distinguish the differences between known-groups that had been identified in literature. The SF-6D may be a suitable measure of preference-based HRQOL for patients with bipolar disorder, but caution is needed due to its lower convergence with the YMRS mania scale. LIMITATIONS: The subsample of patients in manic episode was small, which may reduce the reliability of study findings regarding this specific clinical state. In terms of generalizability, the STEP-BD study sample is based on patients who received treatment in bipolar specialty clinics affiliated with academic medical centers, which may be different from other outpatient clinics. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: The mean health utility value for patients with hypomania is significantly lower than the mean value for recovered patients. This finding emphasizes the importance of treating hypomania. IMPLICATION FOR HEALTH POLICIES: This study validates an existing approach toward generating health utility values for bipolar disorder. These utility values can be used to create quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), which are the most commonly used measure of health benefit in cost-effectiveness studies. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Studies with larger samples of patients with mania are needed to study measures of health utility in this patient population.

Medical marijuana laws (MMLs) and dispensary provisions not associated with higher odds of adolescent marijuana or heavy marijuana use: A 46 State Analysis, 1991-2015.

Background: States are rapidly moving to reverse marijuana prohibition, most frequently through legalization of medical marijuana laws (MMLs), and there is concern that marijuana legalization may affect adolescent marijuana use. Methods: This natural-experimental study used state Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) data collected from participants in grades 9-12 from 1991 to 2015 in 46 states (N = 1,091,723). Taking advantage of heterogeneity across states in MML status and MML dispensary design, difference-in-difference estimates compared states with enacted MMLs/dispensaries to non-MML/dispensaries states. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to adjust for state and year effects, and student demographics. The main outcome assessed was past 30-day adolescent marijuana use ["any" and "heavy" (≥20)]. Results: In the overall sample, the adjusted odds of adolescents reporting any past 30-day marijuana use was lower in states that enacted MMLs at any time during the study period (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.99; p < .05), and in states with operational dispensaries in 2015 (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.99; p < .05). Among grade cohorts, only 9th graders showed a significant effect, with lower odds of use with MML enactment. We found no effects on heavy marijuana use. Conclusions: This study found no evidence between 1991 and 2015 of increases in adolescents reporting past 30-day marijuana use or heavy marijuana use associated with state MML enactment or operational MML dispensaries. In a constantly evolving marijuana policy landscape, continued monitoring of adolescent marijuana use is important for assessing policy effects.

Evaluating the feasibility and impact of case rate payment for recovery support navigator services: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Acute 24-h detoxification services (detox) are necessary but insufficient for many individuals working towards long-term recovery from opiate, alcohol or other drug addiction. Longer engagement in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment can lead to better health outcomes and reductions in overall healthcare costs. Connecting individuals with post-detox SUD treatment and supportive services is a vital next step. Toward this end, the Massachusetts Medicaid program reimburses Community Support Program staff (CSPs) to facilitate these connections. CSP support services are typically paid on a units-of-service basis. As part of a larger study testing health care innovations, one large Medicaid insurer developed a new cadre of workers, called Recovery Support Navigators (RSNs). RSNs performed similar tasks to CSPs but received more extensive training and coaching and were paid an experimental case rate (a flat negotiated reimbursement). This sub-study evaluates the feasibility and impact of case rate payments for RSN services as compared to CSP services paid fee-for-service. METHODS: We analyzed claims data and RSN service data for a segment of the Massachusetts Medicaid population who had more than one detox admission in the last year and also engaged in post-discharge CSP or RSN services. Qualitative data from key informant interviews and Learning Collaboratives with CSPs and RSNs supplemented the findings. RESULTS: Clients receiving RSN services under the case rate utilized the service significantly longer than clients receiving CSP services under unit-based billing. This resulted in a lower average cost per member per month for RSN clients. However, when calculating total SUD treatment costs per member, RSN client costs were 50% higher than CSP client costs. Provider organizations employing RSNs successfully implemented case rate billing. Benefits included allowing time for outreach efforts and training and coaching, activities not paid under the unit-based system. Yet, RSNs identified staffing and larger systems level challenges to consider when using a case rate payment model. CONCLUSIONS: Addiction is a chronic disease that requires long-term investments. Case rate billing offers a promising option for payers and providers as it promotes continued engagement with service providers. To fully realize the benefits of case rate billing, however, larger systems level changes are needed.

Cost Savings from a Navigator Intervention for Repeat Detoxification Clients.

BACKGROUND: Many clients with substance use disorders (SUD) have multiple admissions to a 24-hour level of care for detoxification without ever progressing to SUD treatment. In the US, health insurers have become concerned about the high costs and ineffective results of repeat detox admissions. For other diseases, health systems increasingly target high-risk, high-cost patients with individually tailored interventions delivered by `navigators' who help patients negotiate the complex health care system. Patient incentives are another increasingly common intervention. AIMS OF THE STUDY: (i) To examine how health care spending was affected by an intervention intended to improve entry to SUD treatment among clients who had multiple detox admissions. (ii) To see whether spending effects, overall and by type of service, differed by intervention arm. (iii) To assess whether the intervention resulted in net savings from the payer perspective, after subtracting implementation costs. METHODS: The intervention was implemented in a segment of the Massachusetts Medicaid population, and used Recovery Support Navigators (RSNs) who were trained to effectively engage and connect clients with SUD to follow-up care and community resources. Services were funded using a flat daily rate per client. Additionally, in one of the two intervention arms, clients were offered successive incentive payments for meeting pre-specified milestones to reinforce recovery-oriented behaviors. For this paper, multivariate analyses of claims and administrative data were used to measure the intervention's effect on health care spending, and to estimate net savings to the payer. RESULTS: Health care spending grew 1.6 percentage points more slowly for intervention-enrolled members than for others, implying gross savings of $68 per member per month. After subtracting intervention-related costs, net savings were estimated at $57 per member per month. The intervention was also associated with shifts in the health care service mix from more to less acute settings. DISCUSSION: While the results for total spending did not reach statistical significance, they suggest some potential for insurers to reduce the health care costs associated with repeat detox utilization by using a navigator-based intervention. Analyses reported elsewhere found that this intervention had favorable effects on rates of initiation of SUD treatment. Limitations of the study include the fact that neither subjects nor sites were randomized between study groups; lack of data on crime or productivity outcomes; low participant use of RSN services; and a policy change which altered the participant pool and truncated follow-up for some. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: These results suggest some potential for payers to reduce the health care costs associated with repeat detox by using a navigator-based intervention. To the extent that this results in shifting resources from repeat detox to actual treatment, the result should provide longer term benefit to the population coping with SUD. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: These results may encourage Medicaid and other payers to further experiment with similar interventions using navigators to decrease health care costs and improved the lives of SUD patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: It could be informative to test similar navigator interventions for detox patients in other settings where enrollment periods are longer.

Heterogeneity of state medical marijuana laws and adolescent recent use of alcohol and marijuana: Analysis of 45 states, 1991-2011.

OBJECTIVE: To assess associations between enactment of state medical marijuana laws (MMLs), MML restrictiveness, and past-30-day youth alcohol use overall, and in relation to marijuana use. METHOD: This quasi-experimental difference-in-difference designed study used state-level Youth Risk Behavior Survey data of 9th-12th grade students in 45 states from 1991-2011 (N D 715,014). We conducted bivariate (unadjusted) and multivariable (adjusted for state, year, individual characteristics) logistic regression analyses to examine the effect of MML enactment (yes/no) and less restrictive vs. more restrictive MMLs on five varying measures of past 30-day alcohol use (i.e., any use or binge) and alcohol and marijuana use behaviors. RESULTS: In the final adjusted analyses, MML enactment was associated with lower odds of adolescent past 30-day (1) alcohol use (OR D 0.92, [0.87, 0.97], p < .01) and (2) use of both alcohol and marijuana (OR D 0.93, [0.87, 0.99], p < .05). States with less restrictive MMLs had lower odds of past 30-day (1) alcohol use (OR D 0.94, [0.92, 0.97], p < .001), (2) binge drinking (OR D 0.96, [0.93, 0.97], p < .05), (3) alcohol use without any marijuana use (OR D 0.96, [0.93, 0.99], p < .01), and (4) use of both alcohol and marijuana (OR D 0.96, [0.92, 0.99], p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that enactment of any MML, and of less restrictive MMLs, was associated with lower odds of past 30-day adolescent alcohol use among adolescents. With continued change in state marijuana laws, it is important to monitor the effect of their enactment and implementation, as well as their specific provisions (e.g. dispensaries, home cultivation), which may differentially affect adolescent behaviors.

Implementing single-item screening for drug use in a Veterans Health Administration outpatient setting.

BACKGROUND: Unhealthy drug use is a concern in many settings, including military and veteran populations. In 2013, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical center in Bedford, Massachusetts, started requiring routine screening for unhealthy drug use in outpatient primary care and mental health settings, using a validated single question. METHODS: This study used descriptive and multivariable analyses of VHA electronic records for patients eligible for the screening program (N = 16,118). The study assessed first-year rates and predictors of screening and of positive screens, both for drug use and for unhealthy alcohol use, for which screening was already required. RESULTS: During the first year, 70% of patients were screened for unhealthy drug use and 84% were screened for unhealthy alcohol use. In multivariable analyses, screening for drug use was more likely for patients who had 8 or more days with VHA visits or were aged 40 or over. Patients with a prior drug use disorder diagnosis were much less likely to be screened. Three percent of patients screened for unhealthy drug use had a positive screen, and 14% of those screened for unhealthy alcohol use had a positive screen. Strong predictors of a positive drug use screen included a prior-year diagnosis of drug use disorder, any mental health clinic visits, younger age, or being unmarried. CONCLUSIONS: The drug screening initiative was relatively successful in its first-year implementation, having screened 70% of eligible subjects. However, it failed to screen many of those most likely to screen positive, thereby missing many opportunities to address unhealthy drug use. Future refinements should include better training clinicians in how to ask sensitive questions and how to address positive screens.

Projected Spending on Psychotropic Medications 2013-2020.

Spending on psychotropic medications has grown rapidly in recent decades. Using national data on drug expenditures, patent expirations, future drug development and expert interviews, we project that spending will grow more slowly over the period 2012-2020. The average annual increase is projected to be just 3.0 % per year, continuing the steady deceleration in recent years. The main drivers of this expected deceleration include slower development of new drugs, upcoming patent expirations which will lower prices, and payers' growing ability to manage utilization and promote generic use. The slowdown will relieve some cost pressures on payers, particularly Medicare and Medicaid.

Management of Newer Antidepressant Medications in U.S. Commercial Health Plans.

BACKGROUND: Private health insurance plays a large role in the U.S. health system, including for many individuals with depression. Private insurers have been actively trying to influence pharmaceutical utilization and costs, particularly for newer and costlier medications. The approaches that insurers use may have important effects on patients' access to antidepressant medications. AIMS OF THE STUDY: To report which approaches (e.g., tiered copayments, prior authorization, and step therapy) commercial health plans are employing to manage newer antidepressant medications, and how the use of these approaches has changed since 2003. METHODS: Data are from a nationally representative survey of commercial health plans in 60 market areas regarding alcohol, drug abuse and mental health services in 2010. Responses were obtained from 389 plans (89% response rate), reporting on 925 insurance products. For each of six branded antidepressant medications, respondents were asked whether the plan covered the medication and if so, on what copayment tier, and whether it was subject to prior authorization or step therapy. Measures of management approach were constructed for each medication and for the group of medications. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to test for association of the management approach with various health plan characteristics. RESULTS: Less than 1% of health plan products excluded any of the six antidepressants studied. Medications were more likely to be subjected to restrictions if they were newer, more expensive or were reformulations. 55% of products used placement on a high cost-sharing tier (3 or 4) as their only form of restriction for newer branded antidepressants. This proportion was lower than in 2003, when 71% of products took this approach. In addition, only 2% of products left all the newer branded medications unrestricted, down from 25% in 2003. Multivariate analysis indicated that preferred provider organizations were more likely than other product types to use tier 3 or 4 placement. DISCUSSION: We find that U.S. health plans are using a variety of strategies to manage cost and utilization of newer branded antidepressant medications. Plans appear to be finding that approaches other than exclusion are adequate to meet their cost-management goals for newer branded antidepressants, although they have increased their use of administrative restrictions since 2003. Limitations include lack of information about how administrative restrictions were applied in practice, information on only six medications, and some potential for endogeneity bias in the regression analyses. CONCLUSION: This study has documented substantial use of various restrictions on access to newer branded antidepressants in U.S. commercial health plans. Most of these medications had generic equivalents that offered at least some substitutability, reducing access concerns. At the same time, it is worth noting that high copayments and administrative requirements can nonetheless be burdensome for some patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: Health plans' pharmacy management approaches may concern policymakers less than in the early 2000s, due to the lesser distinctiveness of today's branded medications. This may change depending on future drug introductions. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Future research should examine the impact of plans' pharmacy management approaches, using patient-level data.

Payment-related barriers to medications for opioid use disorder: A critical review of the literature and real-world application.

BACKGROUND: The national opioid crisis continues to intensify, despite the fact that opioid use disorder (OUD) is treatable and opioid overdose deaths are preventable through first-line treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study identifies and categorizes payment-related barriers that impact MOUD access and retention from both the provider and patient perspectives and provides insight into how these barriers can be addressed. METHODS: We performed a critical review of the literature (peer-reviewed studies and relevant documents from the gray literature) to identify payment-related access and retention barriers to MOUD. We used the results of this review to develop an analytic framework to understand how payment impacts MOUD access and retention for both providers and patients. In addition, we reviewed action plans developed by Massachusetts communities that participated in the Healing Communities Study (HCS) to analyze which payment-related barriers were addressed through the study. RESULTS: We identified 18 payment-related barriers that patients or providers face when initiating or continuing MOUD with either methadone or buprenorphine in Opioid Treatment Programs (OTP) and non-OTP settings. Patient-related barriers mainly relate to health insurance coverage or the design of health plans (e.g., cost sharing, covered benefits) resulting in direct (medical and non-medical) and indirect costs that can affect both access and retention, especially as they relate to services provided in OTPs. Provider-related barriers include low reimbursement and administrative burden and are most likely to impact access to MOUD. Evidence-based strategies to expand MOUD as part of the HCS in Massachusetts targeted about half of the patient and provider payment-related barriers identified. CONCLUSION: Patients and providers face an array of payment-related barriers that impact access to and retention on MOUD, most of which relate to inadequate health insurance coverage, features of health plans, and key federal and state policies. As new regulatory policies are enacted that expand access to MOUD, such as greater flexibility in OTPs and MOUD delivered via telehealth, it will be important to align these delivery changes with payment reform involving payers, providers, and policymakers.

Medical Cannabis Dosing Trajectories of Patients: Evidence From Sales Data.

PURPOSE: Medical cannabis use is rising with limited high-quality clinical trial data to guide dosing. This study relies on real-world, longitudinal medical cannabis purchase data to provide information on Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) dosing trends for patients with qualifying medical conditions. METHODS: A retrospective study of purchases by 16,727 patients obtaining medical cannabis from dispensaries located in New York between 2016 and 2019, recorded in point-of-sale data. Group-based trajectory modeling was used to identify clusters of patients following similar progressions in dosing of THC and CBD over time. χ2 tests were performed to identify which patient characteristics and qualifying medical conditions were associated with membership in each trajectory group. FINDINGS: Six trajectory groups were identified that described different patterns in the THC and CBD doses that patients purchased over the whole time period. For THC, the majority of patients (62.6%) purchased a steady amount but at different levels: consistently low (4.1 mg) or moderate (7.4 mg). Three groups, representing 22.0% together, exhibited doses that either fluctuate or constantly increase over time (5-20 mg). A final group of patients (15.8%) exhibited constant decrease in dose from 11 to 5 mg. For CBD, the data show similar trajectories, but at the generally higher values (4-16 mg). Patients with chronic pain, neuropathy, and cancer were overrepresented in groups where higher doses of THC were purchased over time. Patients with epilepsy had a higher representation in groups with higher doses of CBD across time. IMPLICATIONS: Results suggest heterogeneous dosing patterns and trajectories in the use of medical cannabis by patients with different medical conditions.

Mobile clinics for opioid use disorders: What they do and how they do it. A qualitative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: People with substance use disorders (SUD) face many barriers to receiving evidence-based treatments including access to and cost of treatment. People who use drugs face stigma that limits access to traditional office-based clinics. With the goal of reducing morbidity and mortality, mobile clinics reduce many of these barriers by providing harm reduction and on-demand low-threshold medical care. METHODS: In 2020 Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) Mobile Addiction Services Program expanded a program called Community Care in Reach building on its success in reducing barriers to care and increasing patient encounters. In the current evaluation we conducted site visits to the four new mobile clinics and conducted one individual semi-structured provider interview at each of the four clinics. In addition, we supported a monthly learning collaborative of staff in four agencies involved with this initiative. The current evaluation used the RE-AIM framework to analyze the implementation of the mobile clinics. RESULTS: Clinicians described many challenges and opportunities. The typical patient is unhoused, having a substance use disorder, and disconnected from traditional pathways to care. Clinicians are able to initiate people on buprenorphine largely due to the trust they establish with patients. Referral networks are facilitated by established community linkages. The philosophy of care is patient-centered. Mobile clinics provide a wide range of healthcare services including harm reduction, although finding a location to park and relations with police can be challenging. The workflow is uneven due to the model that is built on unscheduled visits. CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into how mobile clinics address the gaps in care for persons with OUD and fatal opioid overdoses. Harm reduction services are a critical intervention and financial sustainability of mobile clinics has to be tested.

Medicaid managed care restrictions on medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether Medicaid managed care plan (MCP) utilization management policies for buprenorphine-naloxone and injectable naltrexone are related to key state Medicaid program policy decisions. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: We abstracted data on state Medicaid regulatory and policy information from publicly available sources and publicly available insurance benefit documentation from all 241 Medicaid MCPs operating in 2021. STUDY DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, we used bivariate and multivariate analyses to examine whether Medicaid MCP prior authorization and quantity limits on receipt of buprenorphine and injectable naltrexone were associated with key state Medicaid choices to leverage federal funds to expand coverage and eligibility (Medicaid expansion, 1115 waivers) and to regulate Medicaid MCPs (uniform preferred drug lists, medical loss ratio remittance). Models were adjusted for MCP characteristics, including profit status, behavioral health contracting arrangement, National Committee for Quality Assurance accreditation, size, market share, and state opioid overdose death rates. Average marginal effects (AME) were reported. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Utilization management was common among MCPs, and restrictions were more commonly applied to buprenorphine than injectable naltrexone, despite its higher cost. States that required MCPs to comply with utilization management policies stipulated in a uniform preferred drug list were more likely to require prior authorization for buprenorphine (AME: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15-0.42) and injectable naltrexone (AME: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.12-0.38). MCPs in states that required plans to pay back earnings above a certain threshold were less likely to require prior authorization for buprenorphine (AME: -0.30, 95% CI: -0.43 to -0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Restrictions on medications for opioid use disorder are widespread among MCPs and vary by medication. State Medicaid regulatory and policy characteristics were strongly linked to MCPs' utilization management approaches. State Medicaid policy and contracting approaches may be levers to eliminate utilization management restrictions on medications for opioid use disorder.

Drinking patterns of older adults with chronic medical conditions.

BACKGROUND: Understanding alcohol consumption patterns of older adults with chronic illness is important given the aging baby boomer generation, the increase in prevalence of chronic conditions and associated medication use, and the potential consequences of excessive drinking in this population. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of alcohol consumption patterns, including at-risk drinking, in older adults with at least one of seven common chronic conditions. DESIGN/METHODS: This descriptive study used the nationally representative 2005 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey linked with Medicare claims. The sample included community-dwelling, fee-for-service beneficiaries 65 years and older with one or more of seven chronic conditions (Alzheimer's disease and other senile dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, and stroke; n = 7,422). Based on self-reported alcohol consumption, individuals were categorized as nondrinkers, within-guidelines drinkers, or at-risk drinkers (exceeds guidelines). RESULTS: Overall, 30.9 % (CI 28.0-34.1 %) of older adults with at least one of seven chronic conditions reported alcohol consumption in a typical month in the past year, and 6.9 % (CI 6.0-7.8 %) reported at-risk drinking. Older adults with higher chronic disease burdens were less likely to report alcohol consumption and at-risk drinking. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-third of older adults with selected chronic illnesses report drinking alcohol and almost 7 % drink in excess of National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) guidelines. It is important for physicians and patients to discuss alcohol consumption as a component of chronic illness management. In cases of at-risk drinking, providers have an opportunity to provide brief intervention or to offer referrals if needed.

Health expenditures, health outcomes and the role of good governance.

This paper examines the relationship between country health spending and selected health outcomes (infant mortality and child mortality), using data from 133 low and middle-income countries for the years 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2006. Health spending has a significant effect on reducing infant and under-5 child mortality with an elasticity of 0.13 to 0.33 for infant mortality and 0.15 to 0.38 for under-5 child mortality in models estimated using fixed effects methods (depending on models employed). Government health spending also has a significant effect on reducing infant and child mortality and the size of the coefficient depends on the level of good governance achieved by the country, indicating that good governance increases the effectiveness of health spending. This paper contributes to the new evidence pointing to the importance of investing in health care services and the importance of governance in improving health outcomes.

The role of health plans in addressing the opioid crisis: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Health plans are key players in substance use treatment in the United States, and the opioid crisis presents new challenges for them. This article is part of the HEALing Communities Study (HCS) funded by NIH, which seeks to facilitate communities' adoption of activities that might reduce overdose deaths, including overdose prevention education and naloxone distribution, medication for opioid use disorder, and safer opioid prescribing. We examine how health plans in one state (Massachusetts) are adapting to encourage and sustain activities that help communities to address opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with managers of behavioral health services at eight health plans in Massachusetts that that have Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial lines of business. Two plans in this sample contract with a specialized behavioral health organization ("carve-out"). The interviewees also completed a survey on policies regarding access to treatment and opioid prescribing. Interviews were recorded and transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. Analysis of the data included intended influence of the policies at three levels: member level (micro), group or community level (meso), and system or institutional level (macro). RESULTS: All health plans developed strategies to increase access to treatment for OUD, primarily through eliminating or decreasing cost-sharing, eliminating pre-authorization for MOUD, and increasing supply of providers. Health plans encourage qualified practitioners to offer MOUD, but most do not provide incentives or training. Identifying high risk populations is a focus of health plans in this sample. Naloxone is a covered benefit in all health plans, although with variation in monthly limits and cost-sharing. Most health plans take measures to influence opioid prescribing. Health plans' activities are predominately aimed at the micro (member) level with little ability to influence at the macro (wider system-level changes). CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into how health plans develop strategies to address the rise in OUD and fatal opioid overdoses, many of which are key in the HCS initiative. How active a role health plans play in addressing the opioid crisis varies, even within the insurance industry in one state (Massachusetts).