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.

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.

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).

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Trends and correlated outcomes in population-level prescription opioid and transdermal fentanyl use in Israel.

BACKGROUND: In the last twenty years, there was a documented increase in prescription opioid procurement in Israel. However, there is still little evidence of the association between opioid procurement rates, health service utilisation in secondary care, and enrollment rates to substance use disorder treatment programmes. In this study, we show trends in the reports of opioid-related hospitalisations, emergency department visits, enrollment to community-based outpatient treatment for Prescription Opioid Use Disorder and opioid-related mortality rates. Additionally, we examine potential correlations between these health service utilisation rates and prescription opioid procurement rates at the population level, with a focus on transdermal fentanyl. METHODS: A longitudinal study at the population level. We used seven-year data on indicators of opioid-related morbidity, prescription opioid procurement data for 2015-2021, and six-year opioid-related mortality data for 2015-2020. We measure the correlation between procurement rates of prescription opioids in Oral Morphine Equivalent per capita, and aggregated rates obtained from hospital administrative data for hospitalisations, emergency department visits, and patient enrolment in specialised prescription opioid use disorder outpatient treatment in the community setting. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2021, procurement rates in primary care per capita for all prescription opioids increased by 85%, while rates of transdermal fentanyl procurement increased by 162%. We found a significant positive correlation at the population level, between annual opioid procurement rates, and rates per population of opioid-related visits to emergency departments (r = 0.96, p value < 0.01, [CI 0.74-0.99]), as well as a positive correlation with the rates per population of patient enrolment in specialised prescription opioid use disorder outpatient treatment (r = 0.93, p value = 0.02, [CI 0.58-0.99]). Opioid-related mortality peaked in 2019 at 0.31 deaths per 100,000 but decreased to 0.20 deaths per 100,000 in 2020. CONCLUSION: Data shows that all-opioid and transdermal fentanyl procurement has increased yearly between 2015 and 2021. This increase is positively correlated with a growing demand for community-based Prescription Opioid Use Disorder outpatient treatment. Efforts to reduce opioid-related morbidity may require effective approaches toward appropriate prescribing, monitoring, and further increasing access to prescription opioid outpatient treatment.

Opioid overdose prevention education in Texas during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Distribution of naloxone and training on its proper use are evidence-based strategies for preventing opioid overdose deaths. In-person naloxone training was conducted in major metropolitan areas and urban centers across Texas as part of a state-wide targeted opioid response program. The training program transitioned to a live, virtual format during the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. This manuscript describes the impact of this transition through analyses of the characteristics of communities reached using the new virtual training format. CASE PRESENTATION: Training participant addresses were compared to county rates of opioid overdose deaths and broadband internet access, and census block comparison to health services shortages, rural designation, and race/ethnicity community characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual training format reached more learners than the in-person events. Training reached nearly half of the counties in Texas, including all with recent opioid overdose deaths. Most participants lived in communities with a shortage of health service providers, and training reached rural areas, those with limited broadband internet availability, and majority Hispanic communities. In the context of restrictions on in-person gathering, the training program successfully shifted to a live, online format. This transition increased participation above rates observed pre-pandemic and reached communities with the need for equipping those most likely to witness an opioid overdose with the proper use of naloxone.

Development and design of a mobile application for prescription opioid clinical decision-making: a feasibility study in New York City, USA.

OBJECTIVES: Excessive opioid prescribing is a contributing factor to the opioid epidemic in the USA. We aimed to develop, implement and evaluate the usability of a clinical decision-making mobile application (app) for opioid prescription after surgery. METHODS: We developed two clinical decision trees, one for opioid prescription after adult laparoscopic cholecystectomy and one for posterior spinal fusion surgery in adolescents. We developed a mobile app incorporating the two algorithms with embedded clinical decision-making, which was tested by opioid prescribers. A survey collected prescription intention prior to app use and participants' evaluation. Participants included opioid prescribers for patients undergoing (1) laparoscopic cholecystectomy in adults or (2) posterior spinal fusion in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. RESULTS: Eighteen healthcare providers were included in this study (General Surgery: 8, Paediatrics: 10). Intended opioid prescription before app use varied between departments (General Surgery: 0-10 pills (mean=5.9); Paediatrics: 6-30 pills (mean=20.8)). Intention to continue using the app after using the app multiple times varied between departments (General Surgery: N=3/8; Paediatrics: N=7/10). The most reported reason for not using the app is lack of time. CONCLUSIONS: In this project evaluating the development and implementation of an app for opioid prescription after two common surgeries with different prescription patterns, the surgical procedure with higher intended and variable opioid prescription (adolescent posterior spinal fusion surgery) was associated with participants more willing to use the app. Future iterations of this opioid prescribing intervention should target surgical procedures with high variability in both patients' opioid use and providers' prescription patterns.

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.

Telehealth for management of chronic non-cancer pain and opioid use disorder in safety net primary care.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic increased use of telehealth for the management of opioid use disorder and chronic non-cancer pain in primary care safety net clinical systems. Significant barriers to telehealth exist, little is known about how these barriers impact urban safety net, primary care providers and their patients. The objective of this study was to qualitatively assess the benefits and challenges of telehealth for management of chronic non-cancer pain, opioid use disorder, and multi-morbidity in primary care, safety net clinical systems. METHODS: We interviewed patients with chronic non-cancer pain and history of substance use (n = 22) and their primary care clinicians (n = 7) in the San Francisco Bay Area, March-July 2020. We recorded, transcribed, coded, and content analyzed interviews. RESULTS: COVID-19 shelter-in-place orders contributed to increases in substance use and uncontrolled pain, and posed challenges for monitoring opioid safety and misuse through telehealth. None of the clinics used video visits due to low digital literacy/access. Benefits of telehealth included decreased patient burden and missed appointments and increased convenience and control of some chronic conditions (e.g., diabetes, hypertension). Telehealth challenges included loss of contact, greater miscommunication, and less comprehensive care interactions. CONCLUSIONS: This study is one of the first to examine telehealth use in urban safety net primary care patients with co-occurring chronic non-cancer pain and substance use. Decisions to continue or expand telehealth should consider patient burden, communication and technology challenges, pain control, opioid misuse, and medical complexity.

"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.

Predictors of opioid overdose during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of relapse, treatment access and nonprescribed buprenorphine/naloxone.

INTRODUCTION: Emerging data indicate a disproportionate increase in overdose deaths since the onset of COVID-19. Speculation about causes for the increase center on rising drug use, illicit drug supply changes, and reduced treatment access. Possible overdose mitigation factors include reduced federal MOUD prescribing restrictions, naloxone distribution programs, and increased use of telehealth. Similarly, nonprescribed buprenorphine (NPB) use, increasingly described as a harm reduction strategy in the absence of treatment, may have moderated overdose risk. This study explored factors associated with pandemic-related overdose in people who use opioids (PWUO) in New Jersey. METHODS: We surveyed 342 PWUO from March to May 2021. Approximately 50 % of our sample was treated at some time since the COVID-19 emergency declaration in March 2020. The risk and protective factors associated with overdose were identified using Pearson's chi square test and ANOVA and tested in a series of multivariable logistic regression models for the full sample and the subsample of PWUO treated during the pandemic. RESULTS: Forty-eight percent of respondents increased their drug use during the pandemic, including 32 % who relapsed after previous abstinence. Fifteen percent overdosed at least once since March 2020. In the full sample, overdose was associated with Hispanic ethnicity (AOR = 3.51; 95 % CI = 1.22-10.11), pre-pandemic overdose (AOR = 6.75; 95 % CI = 3.03-15.02), lack/loss of medical insurance (AOR = 3.02; 95 % CI = 1.01-9.02), relapse (AOR = 2.94; 95 % CI = 1.36-6.36), and nonprescribed use of buprenorphine/naloxone (AOR = 3.16; 95 % CI = 1.49-6.70). The study found similar trends in the treatment sample, with the exceptions that heroin/fentanyl use also predicted overdose (AOR = 3.43; 95 % CI = 1.20-9.78) and the association of overdose with nonprescribed buprenorphine/naloxone was stronger (AOR = 4.91; 95 % CI = 2.01-12.03). Potential mitigating factors, such as take-home methadone and telehealth, were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Relapse during the pandemic was widespread and a significant contributor to overdose. Lack/loss of medical insurance further exacerbated the risk. Despite the growing literature reporting "therapeutic" use of NPB, people using nonprescribed buprenorphine/naloxone in the current study experienced up to five times the risk of overdose as nonusers. This finding suggests that, despite therapeutic intent, PWUO may be using NPB in ways that are ineffectual for addiction management, especially in the context of changing buprenorphine induction protocols in the context of fentanyl.