Struggling With Recovery From Opioids: Who Is at Risk During COVID-19?

OBJECTIVES: Individuals in recovery from opioid use disorder (OUD) are vulnerable to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Recent findings suggest increased relapse risk and overdose linked to COVID-19-related stressors. We aimed to identify individual-level factors associated with COVID-19-related impacts on recovery. METHODS: This observational study (NCT04577144) enrolled 216 participants who previously partook in long-acting buprenorphine subcutaneous injection clinical trials (2015-2017) for OUD. Participants indicated how COVID-19 affected their recovery from substance use. A machine learning approach Classification and Regression Tree analysis examined the association of 28 variables with the impact of COVID-19 on recovery, including demographics, substance use, and psychosocial factors. Ten-fold cross-validation was used to minimize overfitting. RESULTS: Twenty-six percent of the sample reported that COVID-19 had made recovery somewhat or much harder. Past-month opioid use was higher among those who reported that recovery was harder compared with those who did not (51% vs 24%, respectively; P < 0.001). The final classification tree (overall accuracy, 80%) identified the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) as the strongest independent risk factor associated with reporting COVID-19 impact. Individuals with a BDI-II score ≥10 had 6.45 times greater odds of negative impact (95% confidence interval, 3.29-13.30) relative to those who scored <10. Among individuals with higher BDI-II scores, less progress in managing substance use and treatment of OUD within the past 2 to 3 years were also associated with negative impacts. CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the importance of monitoring depressive symptoms and perceived progress in managing substance use among those in recovery from OUD, particularly during large-magnitude crises.

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.

Trends in Methadone Dispensing for Opioid Use Disorder After Medicare Payment Policy Changes.

Importance: A significant proportion of Medicare beneficiaries have a diagnosed opioid use disorder (OUD). Methadone and buprenorphine are both effective medications for the treatment of OUD (MOUDs); however, Medicare did not cover methadone until 2020. Objective: To examine trends in methadone and buprenorphine dispensing among Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees after 2 policy changes in 2020 related to methadone access. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis of temporal trends in methadone and buprenorphine treatment dispensing assessed MA beneficiary claims from January 1, 2019, through March 31, 2022, captured by Optum's Clinformatics Data Mart. Of 9 870 791 MA enrollees included in the database, 39 252 had at least 1 claim for methadone, buprenorphine, or both during the study period. All available MA enrollees were included. Subanalyses by age and dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid status were conducted. Exposures: Study exposures were (1) the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare bundled payment reimbursement policy for OUD treatment and (2) the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration and CMS Medicare policies designed to facilitate access to treatment for OUD, specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: Study outcomes were trends in methadone and buprenorphine dispensing by beneficiary characteristics. National methadone and buprenorphine dispensing rates were calculated as claims-based dispensing rates per 1000 MA enrollees. Results: Among the 39 252 MA enrollees with at least 1 MOUD dispensing claim (mean age, 58.6 [95% CI, 58.57-58.62] years; 45.9% female), 195 196 methadone claims and 540 564 buprenorphine pharmacy claims were identified, for a total of 735 760 dispensing claims. The methadone dispensing rate for MA enrollees was 0 in 2019 because the policy did not allow any payment until 2020. Claims rates per 1000 MA enrollees were low initially, increasing from 0.98 in the first quarter of 2020 to 4.71 in the first quarter of 2022. Increases were primarily associated with dually eligible beneficiaries and beneficiaries younger than 65 years. National buprenorphine dispensing rates were 4.64 per 1000 enrollees in quarter 1 of 2019, increasing to 7.45 per 1000 enrollees in quarter 1 of 2022. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that methadone dispensing increased among Medicare beneficiaries after the policy changes. Rates of buprenorphine dispensing did not provide evidence that beneficiaries substituted buprenorphine for methadone. The 2 new CMS policies represent an important first step in increasing access to MOUD treatment for Medicare beneficiaries.

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.

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.

"And Then COVID Hits": A Qualitative Study of How Jails Adapted Services to Treat Opioid Use Disorder During COVID-19.

Background: Jails in Massachusetts are among the first nationwide to provide correctional populations with medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD). The COVID-19 pandemic caused jails to pivot and adapt MOUD programming. We aimed to identify adaptations and barriers to MOUD access that COVID-19 exacerbated or created, and document new elements that staff wish to sustain as COVID-19 recedes. Methods: We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews and focus groups in 2020-2021 with 29 jail staff who implement MOUD programming in two Massachusetts jails. We conducted qualitative data analysis in Atlas.ti 8 using an inductive approach. Results: Participants shared that access to MOUD among correctional populations is understood by jail staff to be an essential health service. Thus, to facilitate continued access to MOUD, both during incarceration and also at community reentry, jail staff quickly implemented changes in MOUD regulations and dosing protocols and established telehealth capacity. Despite these program adaptations, participants identified how COVID-19 increased health and social needs among correctional populations, reduced availability of community-based healthcare and recovery-supportive services, and introduced new factors that could undermine recovery. Innovations that participants wished to sustain as COVID-19 receded included telehealth capacity, smaller-sized therapeutic groups, and application of a public health approach to treat opioid use disorder among correctional populations. Conclusions: During disruptive events, jails can adapt MOUD programming to ensure access for people living in jail and upon release. Findings identify factors for understanding the outcomes of jail-based MOUD programming during COVID-19 and highlight opportunities to improve service delivery after COVID-19.

Association of Receipt of Opioid Use Disorder-Related Telehealth Services and Medications for Opioid Use Disorder With Fatal Drug Overdoses Among Medicare Beneficiaries Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Federal emergency authorities were invoked during the COVID-19 pandemic to expand clinical telehealth for opioid use disorder (OUD). Objective: To examine the association of the receipt of telehealth services and medications for OUD (MOUD) with fatal drug overdoses before and during the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used exploratory longitudinal data from 2 cohorts (prepandemic cohort: September 1, 2018, to February 29, 2020; pandemic cohort: September 1, 2019, to February 28, 2021) of Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries aged 18 years or older initiating an episode of OUD-related care using Medicare Fee-for-Service data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and National Death Index data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Data analysis was performed from September 19 to October 17, 2022. Exposures: Prepandemic vs pandemic cohort demographic, medical, substance use, and psychiatric characteristics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Receipt of OUD-related telehealth services, receipt of MOUD, and fatal drug overdose. Results: The prepandemic cohort comprised 105 162 beneficiaries (58.1% female; 67.6% aged 45-74 years). The pandemic cohort comprised 70 479 beneficiaries (57.1% female; 66.3% aged 45-74 years). The rate of all-cause mortality was higher in the pandemic cohort (99.9 per 1000 beneficiaries; 7041 deaths) than in the prepandemic cohort (76.8 per 1000; 8076 deaths) (P < .001). The rate of fatal drug overdoses was higher in the pandemic cohort (5.1 per 1000 beneficiaries; n = 358) than in the prepandemic cohort (3.7 per 1000; n = 391) (P < .001). The percentage of deaths due to a fatal drug overdose was similar in the prepandemic (4.8%) and pandemic (5.1%) cohorts (P = .49). In multivariable analysis of the pandemic cohort, receipt of OUD-related telehealth was associated with a significantly lower adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for fatal drug overdose (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48-0.92) as was receipt of MOUD from opioid treatment programs (aOR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.25-0.68) and receipt of buprenorphine in office-based settings (aOR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.91) compared with those not receiving MOUD; receipt of extended-release naltrexone in office-based settings was not associated with lower odds for fatal drug overdose (aOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.41-3.26). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that, among Medicare beneficiaries initiating OUD-related care during the COVID-19 pandemic, receipt of OUD-related telehealth services was associated with reduced risk for fatal drug overdose, as was receipt of MOUD from opioid treatment programs and receipt of buprenorphine in office-based settings. Strategies to expand provision of MOUD, increase retention in care, and address co-occurring physical and behavioral health conditions are needed.

Impact of changes to the delivery of opioid agonist treatment, introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic, on treatment access and dropout in Ireland: An interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following the emergence of COVID-19, Ireland introduced national contingency guidelines to ensure rapid and uninterrupted access to opioid agonist treatment (OAT). This study aims to assess the impact of changes introduced to the delivery of OAT on the number of people accessing treatment and treatment dropout. METHODS: The study conducted interrupted time series analyses, with separate segmented regression models (March 2019-February 2020) vs (April 2020-March 2021), for (A) total number of people accessing OAT, (B) the number initiating treatment, and (C) the number dropping out of treatment, using data from the National OAT treatment register. The study examined immediate (change in level or intercept: ß2) and long-term impacts (change in slope; i.e., the difference between the slope before and after the intervention: ß3). We performed total and stratified analyses by gender, age group (<40/≥40 years), and OAT drug (methadone or buprenorphine). RESULTS: A total of 10,251 people accessed OAT in Ireland in March 2019 (2 % buprenorphine, n = 178), increasing to 11,441 (4 % buprenorphine, n = 471) in March 2021. The study observed an immediate (ß2 = 504.3, p < 0.001) and continued (ß3 = 31.9, p < 0.001) increase of people accessing treatment following the introduction of the OAT contingency guidelines. In contrast, observed changes in level and slope were not significant for treatment initiation or dropout. The study did find, however, a modest reduction in dropout among those receiving buprenorphine (ß3 = -0.6, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Changes introduced to the delivery of OAT, under the COVID-19 contingency guidelines, are associated with increased access to OAT in Ireland, with no evidence of increase in treatment dropout. Whether these effects will be maintained over time remains to be seen.

"Sign Me Up": a qualitative study of video observed therapy (VOT) for patients receiving expedited methadone take-homes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Federal and state regulations require frequent direct observation of methadone ingestion at an Opioid Treatment Program (OTP)-a requirement that creates barriers to patient access. Video observed therapy (VOT) may help to address public health and safety concerns of providing take-home medications while simultaneously reducing barriers to treatment access and long-term retention. Evaluating user experiences with VOT is important for understanding the acceptability of this strategy. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative evaluation of a clinical pilot program of VOT via smartphone that was rapidly implemented between April and August 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic within three opioid treatment programs. In the program, selected patients submitted video recordings of themselves ingesting methadone take-home doses, which were asynchronously reviewed by their counselor. We recruited participating patients and counselors for semi-structured, individual interviews to explore their VOT experiences after program completion. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key factors influencing acceptability and the effect of VOT on the treatment experience. RESULTS: We interviewed 12 of the 60 patients who participated in the clinical pilot and 3 of the 5 counselors. Overall, patients were enthusiastic about VOT, noting multiple benefits over traditional treatment experiences, including avoiding frequent travel to the clinic. Some noted how this allowed them to better meet recovery goals by avoiding a potentially triggering environment. Most appreciated having increased time to devote to other life priorities, including maintaining consistent employment. Participants described how VOT increased their autonomy, allowed them to keep treatment private, and normalized treatment to align with other medications that do not require in-person dosing. Participants did not describe major usability issues or privacy concerns with submitting videos. Some participants reported feeling disconnected from counselors while others felt more connected. Counselors felt some discomfort in their new role confirming medication ingestion but saw VOT as a useful tool for select patients. CONCLUSIONS: VOT may be an acceptable tool to achieve equipoise between lowering barriers to treatment with methadone and protecting the health and safety of patients and their communities.

A mixed-methods evaluation of an Irish remote model of opioid substitution treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Providing health care to rural communities is a challenge, particular for marginalised groups like people who use drugs. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic further increases these challenges. The use of remote models of care, including telemedicine, help to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 and provide new opportunities to engage existing and new patients in treatment. It is recognised that people who used opioids have increased health needs and struggle to engage in health care compared to the general population. Opioid substitution treatment (OST) is effective at reducing these health inequalities but coverage is often inadequate. To increase access to OST during the pandemic, a national remote model of OST was developed in Ireland. An evaluation is being conducted 18 months after commencement to evaluate its effectiveness at engaging people in OST, its impact on their drug use, general health and quality of life. The evaluation also aims to describe the experiences of both services providers and users and report aspects that can be modified and improved. METHODS: A mixed-methods evaluation is being conducted. It consists of a chart review that collects demographic data (age, sex, family details and education and employment status). It also includes the collection and analysis of data on engagement in treatment, changes in drug use and general health. A series of one-to-one interviews are being conducted (service providers (n=12) and service users (n=10).Thematic analysis of the interview narratives will be conducted using NVivo 11. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The results will be ready in 2022.

"You'll come in and dose even in a global pandemic": A qualitative study of adaptive opioid agonist treatment provision during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) improves multiple health and social outcomes, yet requirements to attend for supervised dosing can be burdensome and stigmatising. The COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions threatened continuity of care and the wellbeing of people receiving OAT, risking a parallel health crisis. This study sought to understand how adaptations in the complex system of OAT provision impacted and responded to risk environments of people receiving OAT during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The analysis draws on semi-structured interviews with 40 people receiving and 29 people providing OAT located across Australia. The study considered the risk environments that produce COVID-19 transmission, treatment (non-)adherence, and adverse events for people receiving OAT. Drawing on theories of risk environments and complex adaptive systems, data were coded and analysed to understand how adaptations to the typically rigid system of OAT provision impacted and responded to risk environments during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: During COVID-19, the complex system of OAT provision demonstrated possibilities for responsive adaptation to the entangled features of risk environments of people receiving OAT. Structural stigma was evident in the services which stayed rigid during the pandemic, requiring people to attend for daily supervised dosing and risking fracturing therapeutic relationships. In parallel, there were several examples of services developing enabling environments by offering flexible care through increased takeaways, treatment subsidies, and home delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Rigidity in the delivery of OAT has been an impediment to achieving health and wellbeing over past decades. To sustain health-promoting environments for people receiving OAT, the wider impacts of the complex system should be acknowledged beyond narrowly defined outcomes relating solely to the medication. Centring people receiving OAT in their own care plans will ensure adaptations in the complex system of OAT provision are responsive to the individual's risk environment.

Patient experiences of methadone treatment changes during the first wave of COVID-19: a national community-driven survey.

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) allowed Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) programs to relax in-person MMT requirements to reduce COVID-19 exposure. This study examines patient-reported changes to in-person methadone clinic attendance requirements during COVID-19. METHODS: From June 7, 2020, to July 15, 2020, a convenience sample of methadone patients (N = 392) were recruited in collaboration with National Survivors Union (NSU) in 43 states and Washington D.C. through social media (Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, and Web site pop-ups). The community-driven research (CDR) online survey collected information on how patient take-home methadone dosing and in-person drug testing, counseling, and clinic visit frequency changed prior to COVID-19 (before March 2020) to during COVID-19 (June and July 2020). RESULTS: During the study time period, the percentage of respondents receiving at least 14 days of take-home doses increased from 22 to 53%, while the percentage receiving one or no take-home doses decreased from 22.4% before COVID-19 to 10.2% during COVID-19. In-person counseling attendance decreased from 82.9% to 19.4%. While only 3.3% of respondents accessed counseling through telehealth before COVID-19, this percentage increased to 61.7% during COVID-19. Many respondents (41.3%) reported visiting their clinics in person once a week or more during COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of COVID-19, methadone patients report decreased in-person clinic attendance and increased take-home doses and use of telehealth for counseling services. However, respondents reported considerable variations, and many were still required to make frequent in-person clinic visits, which put patients at risk of COVID-19 exposure. Relaxations of MMT in-person requirements during COVID-19 should be consistently implemented and made permanent, and patient experiences of these changes should be explored further.

Patients' perceptions of self-administered dosing to opioid agonist treatment and other changes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: During the COVID-19 pandemic, addiction treatment services received official guidance asking them to limit face-to-face contact with patients and to prescribe opioid agonist treatment (OAT) medication flexibly. With the aim for most patients to receive take-home supplies for self-administration rather than attendance for observed daily dosing. DESIGN: This was a theory-driven, clinically applied qualitative study, with data for thematic analysis collected by semi-structured, audio-recorded, telephone interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-seven adults (aged ≥18 years) enrolled in sublingual (tablet) buprenorphine and oral (liquid) methadone OAT. SETTING: Community addictions centre in the London Borough of Lambeth operated by South London and Maudsley NHS Trust. RESULTS: Three major themes were identified: (1) dissatisfaction and perceived stigma with OAT medication dispensing arrangements before the pandemic; (2) positive adaptations in response to COVID-19 by services; (3) participants recommended that, according to preference and evidence of adherence, OAT should be personalised to offer increasing medication supplies for self-administration from as early as 7 days after commencement of maintenance prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: In an applied qualitative study of patients enrolled in OAT during the COVID-19 pandemic, participants endorsed their opportunity to take medication themselves at home and with virtual addiction support. Most patients described a preference for self-administration with increased dispensing supplies, from as early as 7 days into maintenance treatment, if they could demonstrate adherence to their prescription.

Incremental expenditures attributable to daily dispensation and witnessed ingestion for opioid agonist treatment in British Columbia: 2014-20.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: While daily witnessed opioid agonist treatment (OAT) ingestion is common in British Columbia (BC), Canada, and elsewhere, sparse evidence supports this resource-intensive practice. Many settings across North America relaxed restrictions for take-home dosing during the COVID-19 pandemic and have reported consistent or improved patient outcomes. This study measured excess expenditures attributed to daily witnessed pharmacy dispensing compared with weekly or biweekly dispensation schedules. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was a population-level retrospective analysis. We included all methadone, buprenorphine/naloxone and slow-release oral morphine dispensations in BC from 1 January 2014 to 30 December 2020. A total of 24 357 107 OAT dispensations among 51 195 unique individuals with 122 793 person-years of follow-up were included during the study period. MEASUREMENTS: Total expenditures for each person-week of OAT with an estimated expenditure under two scenarios are as follows: (1) a weekly dispensation scenario and (2) a biweekly dispensation scenario. FINDINGS: We estimated excess expenditures attributable to current dispensing practices of between $38 million (2014) and $47.4 million (2018) compared with a hypothetical weekly dispensing schedule, and $43.9 million (2014) to $54.9 million (2018) compared with biweekly dispensing. The majority of these expenditures (58-64%) were attributed to pharmacy dispensing fees ($23 million in 2014 to $30 million in 2018 compared with weekly dispensing; $26.6 million in 2014 to $34.7 million in 2018 compared with biweekly dispensing). CONCLUSION: Daily witnessed opioid agonist treatment ingestion results in more than $30 million in excess expenditures annually in the province of British Columbia, Canada compared with the costs of weekly or biweekly dispensation schedules.

Multidimensional assessment of access to medications for opioid use disorder across urban and rural communities: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The majority of patients with opioid use disorder do not receive medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), especially in rural areas. The patient-centered access to healthcare framework posits access as a multidimensional phenomenon impacted by five healthcare system and five patient ability dimensions. Interventions to improve local MOUD treatment outcomes require an understanding of how these dimensions differ across urban and rural communities. This scoping review sought to systematically appraise the literature on MOUD access across urban and rural communities (i.e., rurality) in the US using the patient-centered access framework. METHODS: We performed a scoping review of 1) electronic databases, 2) grey literature, and 3) correspondence with content experts (March 2021). We included articles specifying the study sample by rurality and examining at least one dimension of access to MOUD. The analysis and qualitative synthesis of study results examined study characteristics and categorized key findings by access dimensions. RESULTS: The search produced 3963 unique articles, of which 147 met inclusion criteria. Among included studies, 96% (142/147) examined healthcare system dimensions of access while less than 20% (25/147) examined any of the five dimensions of patient ability. Additionally, 49% (72/147) of studies compared access dimensions by rurality. Across studies, increasing rurality was associated with fewer available MOUD services, but little was known about geographic variation in other critical dimensions of access. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of studies examined healthcare system dimensions of MOUD access and few studies made comparisons by rurality or prioritized the patient's perspective, limiting our understanding of how access differs by rurality in the US. As COVID-19 spurs novel changes in MOUD delivery, this inadequate multidimensional understanding of MOUD access may impede the tailoring of interventions to local needs. There is an urgent need for mixed-methods and community-engaged research prioritizing the patient's perspective of MOUD access by rurality. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/wk6b9/).

COVID-19 and practice transformation: Building an office-based opioid treatment program in a family medicine residency practice.

INTRODUCTION: This brief report describes how a family medicine residency practice (FMRP) leveraged a resident-led quality improvement project and a grant-funded Addiction Integrated Care Team (AICT) to initiate an office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) program to provide medications for opioid use disorder during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: In 2020, the practice experienced four disruptors that shifted motivation for practice development: (a) The COVID-19 pandemic demanded rapid change in primary care processes/staffing, including pivoting to telehealth/remote practice. (b) The practice's transition to a federally qualified community health center model meant a shift in organizational priorities that required offering OBOT services. (c) External grant resources became available through the AICT program to support practice core for OBOT, and 10 implementation strategies were utilized. (d) A resident champion implemented an OBOT quality improvement project. RESULTS: These efforts resulted in the practice offering the OBOT program and 18 patients receiving OBOT from January 2020 to February 2021, with 10 of 18 patients engaged for 12 months or longer. Further, the cumulative adoption and reach from January 2020 through September 2022 was 15 faculty and 14 residents becoming prescribers and 101 patients served within the OBOT program, respectively. DISCUSSION: FMRPs striving for significant practice transformation, such as implementing an OBOT program during a pandemic, may benefit from synergistic guidance and resources including established theory, strategies from the implementation science literature, and resident-led quality improvement efforts. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Feasibility and Short-Term Effects of Low-Threshold Opioid Substitution Treatment during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Hamburg, Germany.

INTRODUCTION: After rapidly opening up a low-threshold clinic to support heavily opioid-dependent persons at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in April 2020 in Hamburg (Germany), this non-interventional study evaluated the feasibility and short-term effects of opioid substitution treatment (OST). The low-threshold concept was customized for the pandemic situation and is the first of its kind in Germany. METHODS: Patients who had already begun treatment were questioned in two assessments, at T1 shortly after beginning treatment and at T2 6 months later. The primary outcome criterion was their quality of life using the OSTQOL. Secondary criteria included retention rate, their mental and physical health (measured by the BSI-18 and the OTI Health Scale), social situation, drug use, COVID-19 status, and satisfaction with treatment. RESULTS: Out of 84 patients included in the study, 51 participated in both assessments, resulting in a 6-month retention rate of 60.7%. 27.5% were females, and 72.5% were males. The feasibility question of the low-threshold OST clinic can clearly be answered positively. During the course of the study over 6 months, the situation mainly remained stable regarding quality of life, physical and mental health, and days of drug consumption. Patients significantly reduced the time they spent on the drug scene from 8.5 (SD = 7.56) to 6.1 (SD = 6.71) hours a day between the beginning of OST and T2 (p = 0.020). While 56.9% answered to be homeless at the beginning of OST, only 33.3% answered not to have found an accommodation by T2 (p = 0.012). The number of patients having contact to social workers increased from 51.0% to 74.5% (p = 0.004). Almost 2 fifths of the patients took part in PCR testing for COVID-19 (that only being done if they had symptoms), and none of the tests were positive. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the low-threshold OST clinic has been successfully implemented in order to help a vulnerable group of people navigate through a global pandemic and support the public health sector. Further conclusions on effects are limited by the short study period and the small number of patients, which calls for further research studies in a larger setting.

Drug court utilization of medications for opioid use disorder in high opioid mortality communities.

INTRODUCTION: A 2012 national survey found low utilization of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in US drug courts. This study provides an update on MOUD policies and practices among drug courts in communities that the opioid epidemic has substantially impacted. METHODS: The study surveyed adult drug courts (N = 169, 80 % response rate) in US counties with high opioid mortality rates or numbers of opioid-related deaths about their policies and practices relating to MOUD and the overdose-reversal medication, naloxone. RESULTS: Nearly three quarters of the programs (73 %) reported providing access to all FDA-approved MOUD medications, >90 % offer agonist medications (buprenorphine and/or methadone), 80 % provide naloxone training, and 62 % distribute naloxone overdose-reversal kits to their clients. Most programs rely principally on medical judgment for medication decisions (75 %), have received staff training on MOUD (65 %), and have arranged for clients to continue receiving agonist medications while serving jail sanctions for program violations (63 %). Nevertheless, only about one quarter to one half of clients with OUDs receive the medications in most programs, and respondents offered few explanations for this disconnect between policy and practice. In addition, 24 % of the programs continue to overrule medication decisions and 36 % of the jails in these communities do not offer agonist medication for drug court clients serving custodial sanctions. CONCLUSIONS: Programs have achieved substantial progress in the past decade in improving drug court policies concerning MOUD in communities enduring the worst brunt of the opioid epidemic; however, programs require further guidance to help them understand and rectify service barriers and put intended MOUD policies into effective operation. The authors provide recommendations to enhance MOUD utilization in drug courts and the broader criminal justice system.