"A Lot of Things Stopped with COVID": Screening Pregnant Patients for Opioid Use and Related Conditions During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: We explored the impact of COVID-19 on universal screening programs for opioid use and related conditions among practicing clinicians or staff who work with pregnant patients. METHODS: Semi-structured, in-depth qualitative interviews (n = 15) were conducted with practicing clinicians or staff in West-Central Florida between May and October 2020, representing both a range of professions and clinical settings that serve pregnant patients. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and reviewed for accuracy. Independent coders conducted thematic content analysis iteratively in MaxQDA to identify emergent themes. RESULTS: Four main themes were identified: worsening health and life conditions of pregnant patients, impaired patient-provider interactions, lack of priority and resources, and conducting opioid screening remotely. Pregnant patients often faced worsening mental health, lack of connection with health care providers, and socioenvironmental factors that increased the risk of overdose and intimate partner violence. Health care providers and facilities faced an infectious disease pandemic that simultaneously increased mental burden and reduced resources. Telehealth improved access to health care for many, but also came with implementation challenges such as inadequate technology, the need to address barriers to developing rapport with patients, and difficulty with certain social screens. CONCLUSION: These themes describe facilitators of and barriers to implementing opioid and related screening programs during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the increasing urgency of screening because of socioenvironmental factors. Patients, health care providers, and health practices may benefit from emergency plans that anticipate screening challenges given their increased importance during times of heightened risk, including disasters and epidemics.

Clients' experiences on North America's first take-home injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) program: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: To support public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, oral opioid agonist treatment (OAT) take-home doses were expanded in Western countries with positive results. Injectable OAT (iOAT) take-home doses were previously not an eligible option, and were made available for the first time in several sites to align with public health measures. Building upon these temporary risk-mitigating guidelines, a clinic in Vancouver, BC continued to offer two of a possible three daily doses of take-home injectable medications to eligible clients. The present study explores the processes through which take-home iOAT doses impacted clients' quality of life and continuity of care in real-life settings. METHODS: Three rounds of semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted over a period of seventeen months beginning in July 2021 with eleven participants receiving iOAT take-home doses at a community clinic in Vancouver, British Columbia. Interviews followed a topic guide that evolved iteratively in response to emerging lines of inquiry. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then coded using NVivo 1.6 using an interpretive description approach. RESULTS: Participants reported that take-home doses granted them the freedom away from the clinic to have daily routines, form plans, and enjoy unstructured time. Participants appreciated the greater privacy, accessibility, and ability to engage in paid work. Furthermore, participants enjoyed greater autonomy to manage their medication and level of engagement with the clinic. These factors contributed to greater quality of life and continuity of care. Participants shared that their dose was too essential to divert and that they felt safe transporting and administering their medication off-site. In the future, all participants would like more accessible treatment such as access longer take-home prescriptions (e.g., one week), the ability to pick-up at different and convenient locations (e.g., community pharmacies), and a medication delivery service. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing the number of daily onsite injections from two or three to only one revealed the diversity of rich and nuanced needs that added flexibility and accessibility in iOAT can meet. Actions such as licencing diverse opioid medications/formulations, medication pick-up at community pharmacies, and a community of practice that supports clinical decisions are necessary to increase take-home iOAT accessibility.

Pregnancy, Opioid Use Disorder and COVID-19: An Evaluation of Acute Care Presentations During a Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The opioid epidemic has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in increased acute care opioid-related and overdose visits. We sought to assess how the pandemic may have impacted an obstetric cohort impacted by opioid misuse in the acute care context. METHODS: A retrospective review of acute care presentations of patients with concomitant pregnancy (Z33.1) and opioid-related diagnostic codes (T10 codes and/or F11) was conducted over a 24-month period (pre-COVID = March 2019 through February 2020, post-COVID = March 2020 through February 2021). Descriptive statistics and χ2 analysis of pre- versus post-COVID presentations were performed. RESULTS: A total of 193 individuals, 104 (53.9%) pre- and 89 (46.1%) post-COVID, accounting for 292 total encounters, 160 (54.8%) pre- and 132 (45.2%) post-COVID, were seen for acute care visits ( P = 0.84). Age ( P = 0.15), race ( P = 0.59), and insurance status ( P = 0.17) were similar pre- versus post-COVID. The majority of presentations, pre- (40.4%) and post-COVID (44.9%), were for opioid withdrawal ( P = 0.74). Although post-COVID individuals were more likely to lack prenatal care (48.3% versus 39.4% pre-COVID), this trend was not significant ( P = 0.19). Similar proportions of individuals were affected by pregnancy complications (51.9% pre-, 44.9% post-COVID; P = 0.30). Similar proportions of individuals were affected by adverse pregnancy outcomes (44.2% pre-, 48.3% post-COVID; P = 0.64). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic did not have a statistically significant effect on opioid-related acute care presentations or outcomes for obstetric patients. In this acute care cohort, however, opioid misuse had significant general impact on pregnancy complications and outcomes, suggesting unmet needs in this population.

Deimplementation in the provision of opioid agonist treatment to achieve equity of care for people engaged in treatment: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Deimplementation, the removal or reduction of potentially hazardous approaches to care, is key to progressing social equity in health. While the benefits of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) are well-evidenced, wide variability in the provision of treatment attenuates positive outcomes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, OAT services deimplemented aspects of provision which had long been central to treatment in Australia; supervised dosing, urine drug screening, and frequent in-person attendance for review. This analysis explored how providers considered social inequity in health of patients in the deimplementation of restrictive OAT provision during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Between August and December 2020, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 OAT providers in Australia. Codes relating to the social determinants of client retention in OAT were clustered according to how providers considered deimplementation in relation to social inequities. Normalisation Process Theory was then used to analyse the clusters in relation to how providers understood their work during the COVID-19 pandemic as responding to systemic issues that condition OAT access. RESULTS: We explored four overarching themes based on constructs from Normalisation Process Theory: adaptive execution, cognitive participation, normative restructuring, and sustainment. Accounts of adaptive execution demonstrated tensions between providers' conceptions of equity and patient autonomy. Cognitive participation and normative restructuring were integral to the workability of rapid and drastic changes within the OAT services. Key transformative actors included communities of practice and "thought leaders" who had long supported deimplementation for more humane care. At this early stage of the pandemic, providers had already begun to consider how this period could inform sustainment of deimplementation. When considering a future, post-pandemic period, several providers expressed discomfort at operating with "evidence-enough" and called for narrowly defined types of data on adverse events (e.g. overdose) and expert consensus on takeaway doses. CONCLUSIONS: The possibilities for achieving social equity in health are limited by the divergent treatment goals of providers and people receiving OAT. Sustained and equitable deimplementation of obtrusive aspects of OAT provision require co-created treatment goals, patient-centred monitoring and evaluation, and access to a supportive community of practice for providers.

Clinics Optimizing MEthadone Take-homes for opioid use disorder (COMET): Protocol for a stepped-wedge randomized trial to facilitate clinic level changes.

INTRODUCTION: Regulatory changes made during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) that relaxed criteria for take-home dosing (THD) of methadone offer an opportunity to improve quality of care with a lifesaving treatment. There is a pressing need for research to study the long-term effects of the new PHE THD rules and to test data-driven interventions to promote more effective adoption by opioid treatment programs (OTPs). We propose a two-phase project to develop and test a multidimensional intervention for OTPs that leverages information from large State administrative data. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We propose a two-phased project to develop then test a multidimensional OTP intervention to address clinical decision making, regulatory confusion, legal liability concerns, capacity for clinical practice change, and financial barriers to THD. The intervention will include OTP THD specific dashboards drawn from multiple State databases. The approach will be informed by the Health Equity Implementation Framework (HEIF). In phase 1, we will employ an explanatory sequential mixed methods design to combine analysis of large state administrative databases-Medicaid, treatment registry, THD reporting-with qualitative interviews to develop and refine the intervention. In phase 2, we will conduct a stepped-wedge trial over three years with 36 OTPs randomized to 6 cohorts of a six-month clinic-level intervention. The trial will test intervention effects on OTP-level implementation outcomes and patient outcomes (1) THD use; 2) retention in care; and 3) adverse healthcare events). We will specifically examine intervention effects for Black and Latinx clients. A concurrent triangulation mixed methods design will be used: quantitative and qualitative data collection will occur concurrently and results will be integrated after analysis of each. We will employ generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) in the analysis of stepped-wedge trials. The primary outcome will be weekly or greater THD. The semi-structured interviews will be transcribed and analyzed with Dedoose to identify key facilitators, barriers, and experiences according to HEIF constructs using directed content analysis. DISCUSSION: This multi-phase, embedded mixed methods project addresses a critical need to support long-term practice changes in methadone treatment for opioid use disorder following systemic changes emerging from the PHE-particularly for Black and Latinx individuals with opioid use disorder. By combining findings from analyses of large administrative data with lessons gleaned from qualitative interviews of OTPs that were flexible with THD and those that were not, we will build and test the intervention to coach clinics to increase flexibility with THD. The findings will inform policy at the local and national level.

The incidence of new and persistent benzodiazepine use after surgery.

BACKGROUND: It is possible that a portion of new and new persistent use of benzodiazepines is among individuals who start using the medications before or after surgery. We studied the incidence of new and new persistent benzodiazepine use among patients undergoing surgery. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center, population-based cohort of all individuals ≥18 years undergoing first surgery between January 2, 2006 and December 31, 2018 with a year of follow-up for filled medications. Benzodiazepine-naïve patients were defined as not filling a prescription from a year to 31 days before surgery. Patients with new use were naïve patients who filled a prescription between 30 days before and 14 days after surgery, and patients with new persistent use were patients with new use who filled a prescription between 15 days and a year after surgery. Patient and procedural characteristics and prescription filling patterns between the groups were compared. RESULTS: A total of 55,997 patients (32,136 women [57.4%]; median [interquartile range] age, 55 [39, 69] years) were included. The incidence of new use among naïve patients was 2.7% (95% confidence interval, 2.6%-2.8%; n = 1,311), and, of those, 43.7% (95% confidence interval, 41.0%-46.5%; n = 571) had new persistent benzodiazepine use. Approximately 10% of patients with new use filled a prescription for benzodiazepine in every 30-day window during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: A small portion of surgical patients begin benzodiazepine use perioperatively, but subsequently half fill criteria for persistent use. This highlights the importance of identifying strategies to minimize both new use and the progression of new use into persistent use in surgical patients.

Considerations for the design of overdose education and naloxone distribution interventions: results of a multi-stakeholder workshop.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdose epidemic is a public health crisis that is impacting communities around the world. Overdose education and naloxone distribution programs equip and train lay people to respond in the event of an overdose. We aimed to understand factors to consider for the design of naloxone distribution programs in point-of-care settings from the point of view of community stakeholders. METHODS: We hosted a multi-stakeholder co-design workshop to elicit suggestions for a naloxone distribution program. We recruited people with lived experience of opioid overdose, community representatives, and other stakeholders from family practice, emergency medicine, addictions medicine, and public health to participate in a full-day facilitated co-design discussion wherein large and small group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic approaches. RESULTS: A total of twenty-four participants participated in the multi-stakeholder workshop from five stakeholder groups including geographic and setting diversity. Collaborative dialogue and shared storytelling revealed seven considerations for the design of naloxone distribution programs specific to training needs and the provision of naloxone, these are: recognizing overdose, how much naloxone, impact of stigma, legal risk of responding, position as conventional first aid, friends and family as responders, support to call 911. CONCLUSION: To create an naloxone distribution program in emergency departments, family practice and substance use treatment services, stigma is a central design consideration for training and naloxone kits. Design choices that reference the iconography, type, and form of materials associated with first aid have the potential to satisfy the need to de-stigmatize overdose response.

Public transport access to drug treatment before and during COVID-19: Implications for the opioid epidemic.

Public transport disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic had wide-ranging impacts on the ability of individuals to access health care. Individuals with opioid use disorder represent an especially vulnerable population due to the necessity of frequent, supervised doses of opioid agonists. Focused on Toronto, a major Canadian city suffering from the opioid epidemic, this analysis uses novel realistic routing methodologies to quantify how travel times to individuals\220 nearest clinics changed due to public transport disruptions from 2019 to 2020. Individuals seeking opioid agonist treatment face very constrained windows of access due to the need to manage work and other essential activities. We find that thousands of households in the most materially and socially deprived neighbourhoods crossed 30 and 20-minute travel time thresholds to their nearest clinic. As even small changes to travel times can lead to missed appointments and heighten the chances of overdose and death, understanding the distribution of those most impacted can help inform future policy measures to ensure adequate access to care.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on chronic pain and opioid use in marginalized populations: A scoping review.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a variable effect on vulnerable populations, including patients with chronic pain who rely on opioid treatment or have comorbid opioid use disorder. Limited access to care due to isolation measures may lead to increased pain severity, worse mental health symptoms, and adverse opioid-related outcomes. This scoping review aimed to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the dual epidemics of chronic pain and opioids in marginalized communities worldwide. Methods: Searches of primary databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and PsycINFO were performed in March 2022, restricting the publication date to December 1, 2019. The search yielded 685 articles. After title and abstract screening, 526 records were screened by title and abstract, 87 through full-text review, of which 25 articles were included in the final analysis. Results: Our findings illuminate the differential distribution of pain burden across marginalized groups and how it serves to heighten existing disparities. Service disruptions due to social distancing orders and infrastructural limitations prevented patients from receiving the care they needed, resulting in adverse psychological and physical health outcomes. Efforts to adapt to COVID-19 circumstances included modifications to opioid prescribing regulations and workflows and expanded telemedicine services. Conclusion: Results have implications for the prevention and management of chronic pain and opioid use disorder, such as challenges in adopting telemedicine in low-resource settings and opportunities to strengthen public health and social care systems with a multidisciplinary and multidimensional approach.

The Impact of Individual Counseling on Treatment for Opioid Use.

ABSTRACT: In 2018, more than 67,000 people died because of drug overdoses, and of that number, approximately 69.5% involved an opioid, making it a leading cause of death in the United States. Additionally concerning is that 40 states have reported increased overdose deaths and opioid-related deaths since the start of the COVID-19 global pandemic. Presently, many insurance companies and healthcare providers require patients to receive counseling during medication treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), despite the lack of evidence that it is necessary for all patients. To inform policy and improve quality of treatment, this nonexperimental, correlational study examined the relationship between individual counseling status and treatment outcomes in patients receiving medication treatment for OUD. Treatment outcome variables (treatment utilization, medication use, and opioid use) were extracted from the electronic health records of 669 adults who received treatment between January 2016 and January 2018. Study findings suggest women in our sample were more likely to test positive for benzodiazepines (t = -4.3, p < .001) and amphetamines (t = -4.4, p < .001), whereas men used alcohol at higher rates than women (t = 2.2, p = .026). In addition, women were more likely to report having experienced Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder/trauma (χ2 = 16.5, p < .001) and anxiety (χ2 = 9.4, p = .002). Regression analyses revealed concurrent counseling was unrelated to medication utilization and ongoing opioid use. Patients who had prior counseling utilized buprenorphine more frequently (ß = 0.13, p < .001) and used opioids less often (ß = -0.14, p < .001); however, both relationships were weak. These data do not provide evidence that counseling during OUD outpatient has a significant impact on treatment outcomes. These findings provide further evidence that barriers to medication treatment such as mandatory counseling can and should be removed.

Outcomes of a mobile medical unit for low-threshold buprenorphine access targeting opioid overdose hot spots in Chicago.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdoses in Chicago are unevenly distributed, affecting medically underserved neighborhoods most acutely. Innovations in reaching patients perceived to be hard-to-reach (e.g., unstably housed, marginalized), especially in these underserved neighborhoods, are urgently needed to combat the overdose crisis. This study characterizes the pilot year of a mobile medical unit partnership between a large urban academic center and a community-based harm reduction organization in Chicago. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of all patients who were seen on a mobile medical unit focused on providing low-threshold buprenorphine and primary care in areas with high opioid overdose rates on Chicago's West Side. Treatment episodes were accrued between July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022 in the first year of operation. The main outcomes were number of patients seen, demographic characteristics of patients, and reason(s) for visit over time. RESULTS: The study saw 587 unique patients on the mobile medical unit between July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022. Approximately 64.6 % were African American, and more than half lacked active insurance or could not confirm insurance status at the time of visit. The most common reason for initial visit was COVID-19 vaccination (42.4 %), and the most common reason for follow-up visit was buprenorphine treatment (51.0 %). Eleven patients initially presented for other health concerns and later returned to initiate buprenorphine. CONCLUSIONS: The mobile medical unit successfully reached nearly 600 patients in traditionally medically underserved Chicago neighborhoods with the highest overdose rates. The mobile unit's integrated approach met a variety of health needs, including buprenorphine initiation, with a unique opportunity for postoverdose initiation. Several patients initiated buprenorphine after presenting for different health concerns, showing the potential of an integrated approach to build on past mobile outreach programs and reach people with opioid use disorder who are not yet ready to initiate treatment.

Utilizing a National Wastewater Monitoring Program to Address the U.S. Opioid Epidemic: A Focus on Metro Atlanta, Georgia.

The opioid epidemic has continued to be an ongoing public health crisis within Metro Atlanta for the last three decades. However, estimating opioid use and exposure in a large population is almost impossible, and alternative methods are being explored, including wastewater-based epidemiology. Wastewater contains various contaminants that can be monitored to track pathogens, infectious diseases, viruses, opioids, and more. This commentary is focusing on two issues: use of opioid residue data in wastewater as an alternative method for opioid exposure assessment in the community, and the adoption of a streamlined approach that can be utilized by public health officials. Opioid metabolites travel through the sanitary sewer through urine, fecal matter, and improper disposal of opioids to local wastewater treatment plants. Public health officials and researchers within various entities have utilized numerous approaches to reduce the impacts associated with opioid use. National wastewater monitoring programs and wastewater-based epidemiology are approaches that have been utilized globally by researchers and public health officials to combat the opioid epidemic. Currently, public health officials and policy makers within Metro Atlanta are exploring different solutions to reduce opioid use and opioid-related deaths throughout the community. In this commentary, we are proposing a new innovative approach for monitoring opioid use and analyzing trends by utilizing wastewater-based epidemiologic methods, which may help public health officials worldwide manage the opioid epidemic in a large metro area in the future.

Chronic pain and continuity of analgesic treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pain can trigger both physical and mental health complications. During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with chronic diseases have had reduced access to some medications. OBJECTIVE: To determine the pharmacological management of patients with chronic pain and its continuity during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This was a retrospective longitudinal study of the continuity of analgesic use in patients with chronic pain between September 1, 2019 and February 28, 2021 based on a drug dispensing database. Survival analysis was performed until the discontinuation of chronic analgesics. RESULTS: A total of 12,701 patients who were being treated for chronic pain were identified. Their median age was 70.3 years, and 74.4% were women. The pain of rheumatological origin was the most frequent etiology (46.1%); the most used medications were nonopioid analgesics (78.9%), pain modulators (24.8%) and opioid analgesics (23.3%). A total of 76.1% of the patients experienced interruptions in their management during the study period. The median time to the first interruption of treatment was 5.0 months (95% CI: 4.8-5.2). Those who were treated for oncological pain experienced a greater number of interruptions in their management. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacological management of patients with chronic pain is heterogeneous, and this real-world study showed that a high proportion of patients experienced an interruption of pain management during the 12 months following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Risk mitigation guidance and safer supply prescribing among young people who use drugs in the context of COVID-19 and overdose emergencies.

Across North America, overlapping overdose and COVID-19 emergencies have had a substantial impact on young people who use drugs (YPWUD). New risk mitigation guidance (RMG) prescribing practices were introduced in British Columbia, Canada, in 2020 to allow people to decrease risk of overdose and withdrawal and better self-isolate. We examined how the prescribing of hydromorphone tablets specifically impacted YPWUD's substance use and care trajectories. Between April 2020 and July 2021, we conducted virtual interviews with 30 YPWUD who had accessed an RMG prescription of hydromorphone in the previous six months and 10 addiction medicine physicians working in Vancouver. A thematic analysis was conducted. YPWUD participants highlighted a disjuncture between RMG prescriptions and the safe supply of unadulterated substances such as fentanyl, underscoring that having access to the latter is critical to reducing their reliance on street-based drug markets and overdose-related risks. They described re-appropriating these prescriptions to meet their needs, stockpiling hydromorphone so that it could be used as an "emergency backup" when they were unable to procure unregulated, illicit opioids. In the context of entrenched poverty, hydromorphone was also used to generate income for the purchase of drugs and various necessities. For some YPWUD, hydromorphone prescriptions could be used alongside opioid agonist therapy (OAT) to reduce withdrawal and cravings and improve adherence to OAT. However, some physicians were wary of prescribing hydromorphone due to the lack of evidence for this new approach. Our findings underscore the importance of providing YPWUD with a safe supply of the substances they are actively using alongside a continuum of substance use treatment and care, and the need for both medical and community-based safe and safer supply models.

The acceptability of overdose alert and response technologies: introducing the TPOM-ODART framework.

BACKGROUND: Opioids were implicated in approximately 88,000 fatal overdoses (OD) globally. However, in principle all opioid OD are reversible with the timely administration of naloxone hydrochloride. Despite the widespread availability of naloxone among people who use opioids (PWUO), many who suffer fatal OD use alone, without others present to administer the reversal agent. Recognising this key aspect of the challenge calls for innovations, a number of technological approaches have emerged which aim to connect OD victims with naloxone. However, the acceptability of OD response technologies to PWUO is of key concern. METHODS: Drawing on the Technology People Organisations Macroenvironment (TPOM) framework, this study sought to integrate acceptability-related findings in this space with primary research data from PWUO, affected family members and service providers to understand the factors involved in harm reduction technology acceptability. A qualitative study using a focus group methodology was conducted. The participant groups were people with lived experience of problem opioid use, affected family members and service providers. Data analysis followed a multi-stage approach to thematic analysis and utilised both inductive and deductive methods. RESULTS: Thirty individuals participated in one of six focus groups between November 2021 and September 2022. The analysis generated six major themes, three of which are reported in this article-selected for their close relevance to PWUO and their importance to developers of digital technologies for this group. 'Trust-in technologies, systems and people' was a major theme and was closely linked to data security, privacy and confidentiality. 'Balancing harm reduction, safety and ambivalence' reflects the delicate balance technological solutions must achieve to be acceptable to PWUO. Lastly, 'readiness-a double bind' encapsulates the perception shared across participant groups, that those at the highest risk, may be the least able to engage with interventions. CONCLUSION: Effective digital strategies to prevent fatal OD must be sensitive to the complex relationships between technological, social/human, organisational and wider macroenvironmental factors which can enable or impede intervention delivery. Trust, readiness and performance are central to technology acceptability for PWUO. An augmented TPOM was developed (the TPOM-ODART).

Experiences of patients at high risk of opioid overdose accessing emergency department and behavioral health interventions: a qualitative analysis in an urban emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Departments (EDs) have become critical 'touchpoints' for the identification and early engagement of patients at risk of overdose or who have an opioid use disorder (OUD). Our objectives were to examine patients' ED experiences, identify barriers and facilitators of service uptake in ED settings, and explore patients' experiences with ED staff. METHODS: This qualitative study was part of a randomized controlled trial that evaluated the effectiveness of clinical social workers and certified peer recovery specialists in increasing treatment uptake and reducing opioid overdose rates for people with OUD. Between September 2019 and March 2020, semi-structured interviews were conducted 19 participants from the trial. Interviews sought to assess participants' ED care experiences across intervention type (i.e., clinical social worker or peer recovery specialist). Participants were purposively sampled across intervention arm (social work, n = 11; peer recovery specialist, n = 7; control, n = 1). Data were analyzed thematically with a focus on participant experiences in the ED and social and structural factors shaping care experiences and service utilization. RESULTS: Participants reported varied ED experiences, including instances of discrimination and stigma due to their substance use. However, participants underscored the need for increased engagement of people with lived experience in ED settings, including the use of peer recovery specialists. Participants highlighted that ED provider interactions were critical drivers of shaping care and service utilization and needed to be improved across EDs to improve post-overdose care. CONCLUSIONS: While the ED provides an opportunity to reach patients at risk of overdose, our results demonstrate how ED-based interactions and service provision can impact ED care engagement and service utilization. Modifications to care delivery may improve experiences for patients with OUD or at high risk for overdose. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration: NCT03684681.

"As long as that place stays open, I'll stay alive": Accessing injectable opioid agonist treatment during dual public health crises.

BACKGROUND: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, overdose rates in North America have continued to rise, with more than 100,000 drug poisoning deaths in the past year. Amidst an increasingly toxic drug supply, the pandemic disrupted essential substance use treatment and harm reduction services that reduce overdose risk for people who use drugs. In British Columbia, one such treatment is injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT), the supervised dispensation of injectable hydromorphone or diacetylmorphine for people with opioid use disorder. While evidence has shown iOAT to be safe and effective, it is intensive and highly regimented, characterized by daily clinic visits and provider-client interaction-treatment components made difficult by the pandemic. METHODS: Between April 2020 and February 2021, we conducted 51 interviews with 18 iOAT clients and two clinic nurses to understand how the pandemic shaped iOAT access and treatment experiences. To analyze interview data, we employed a multi-step, flexible coding strategy, an iterative and abductive approach to analysis, using NVivo software. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis revealed the ways in which the pandemic shaped clients' lives and the provision of iOAT care. First, client narratives illuminated how the pandemic reinforced existing inequities. For example, socioeconomically marginalized clients expressed concerns around their financial stability and economic impacts on their communities. Second, clients with health comorbidities recognized how the pandemic amplified health risks, through potential COVID-19 exposure or by limiting social connection and mental health supports. Third, clients described how the pandemic changed their engagement with the iOAT clinic and medication. For instance, clients noted that physical distancing guidelines and occupancy limits reduced opportunities for social connection with staff and other iOAT clients. However, pandemic policies also created opportunities to adapt treatment in ways that increased patient trust and autonomy, for example through more flexible medication regimens and take-home oral doses. CONCLUSION: Participant narratives underscored the unequal distribution of pandemic impacts for people who use drugs but also highlighted opportunities for more flexible, patient-centered treatment approaches. Across treatment settings, pandemic-era changes that increase client autonomy and ensure equitable access to care are to be continued and expanded, beyond the duration of the pandemic.

Definitive urine drug test findings in patients prescribed opioids for pain from a large national database.

OBJECTIVE: Clinicians and policymakers have been wrestling with the appropriateness and safety of opioid therapy during the opioid crisis. Policy and clinical decisions have often been made without much current data on trends in drug use in patients with pain. Thus, we evaluated definitive urine drug test (UDT) results in patients being treated for pain to see if those taking their prescribed opioids were less likely to be positive for the primary illicit drugs currently driving overdose deaths: cocaine, heroin, fentanyl, and methamphetamine. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: A cross-sectional study of UDT results from January 1, 2015 to September 30, 2021, from 600,000 patient specimens submitted for testing by pain management specialists. INTERVENTIONS: UDT by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry as ordered by the treating clinician. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Presence of other substances stratified by whether a patient's prescribed opioid was found. RESULTS: The presence of cocaine, heroin, fentanyl, and methamphetamine for the total population was low (<5 percent). Of the 347,092 patients prescribed opioids, 76 percent (n = 264,961) were positive on UDT for their prescribed opioid ("consistent"). Compared to patients without their prescribed opioid present ("inconsistent"), patients consistent with therapy were 54 percent (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.54, 95 percent confidence interval (CI) 1.47-1.59) less likely to be positive for cocaine, 47 percent [IRR 1.47, 95 percent CI 1.34-1.57] less likely to be positive for heroin, and 35 percent [IRR 1.35, 95 percent CI 1.24-1.45] less likely to be positive for methamphetamine, p < 0.001. Differences between the groups for fentanyl were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Overall positivity rates for cocaine, heroin, fentanyl, and methamphetamine were low. Patients with prescribed opioid present were less likely to be positive for cocaine, heroin, or methamphetamine. Patterns of substance use within this pain management population should be used to inform ongoing policy decisions.

Telehealth for opioid use disorder: retention as a function of demographics and rurality.

Background: Despite lifesaving medications such as buprenorphine and methadone, the majority of individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) face access barriers to evidence-based treatment. COVID-19 era regulatory reforms have shown that telehealth can improve access to care, although disparities in clinical outcomes are likely to persist.Objective: We aimed to analyze 180-day and 365-day retention in treatment with buprenorphine for OUD overall and by demographics, hypothesizing that retention would be lower among racial/ethnic minorities and rural patients.Methods: We analyzed data from a cohort of individuals with OUD enrolled in treatment from April 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021, in Pennsylvania and New York using a virtual-first telehealth OUD treatment platform to assess rates of 180-day and 365-day retention. Associations between demographic characteristics and retention were assessed using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models.Results: Among 1,378 patients (58.8% male), 180-day retention was 56.4%, and 365-day retention was 48.3%. Adjusted analyses found that only an association between older age and greater odds of 180-day retention was significant (aOR for patients aged 30-50 vs. <30: 1.83 [1.37-2.45]). There were no significant associations between sex, race/ethnicity, state, or rurality with retention.Conclusion: While we were unable to control for socioeconomic variables, we found retention within telehealth services for buprenorphine was high irrespective of geography or race/ethnicity, but disparities with age indicate a subset of patients who may benefit from more intensive services early in care.

Comparison of the prevalence of opioid use among U.S. adults with cardiac conditions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Limited data are available on the prevalence of prescription opioid use among patients with cardiac conditions who were exposed to increased risks of cardiac events including myocardial failure and cardiac arrest. According to the U.S. National Health Interview Survey, we evaluated the prevalence of opioid use in patients with cardiac conditions who reported prescription opioid use in the past 12 months and 3 months in 2019 and 2020, respectively, and further estimated the prevalence of opioid use for acute pain or chronic pain. We also analyzed the stratified prevalence by demographical characteristics. Our results showed that there was no statistically significant change in the prevalence of opioid use in the past 12 months (26.5% in 2019 vs. 25.7% in 2020) or the past 3 months (66.6% in 2019 vs. 62.5% in 2020) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there was a significant decline in the prevalence of opioid use for acute pain, from 64.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 57.6% to 70.3%) in 2019 to 49.6% (95% CI 40.1% to 59.0%) in 2020 (P = 0.012), particularly in the subgroups of men, non-Hispanic white people, adults with education below high school, those with an income-to-poverty ratio ranging from 1.0 to 1.9, and those covered with health insurance. Our findings suggest that monitoring opioid use in the era of living with COVID-19 is important, which will help inform healthcare providers to develop care strategies to reduce health loss for vulnerable individuals.