Referral to and engagement in substance use disorder treatment within opioid intervention courts in New York: a qualitative study of implementation barriers and facilitators.

BACKGROUND: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are frequently in contact with the court system and have markedly higher rates of fatal opioid overdose. Opioid intervention courts (OIC) were developed to address increasing rates of opioid overdose among court defendants by engaging court staff in identification of treatment need and referral for opioid-related services and building collaborations between the court and OUD treatment systems. The study goal was to understand implementation barriers and facilitators in referring and engaging OIC clients in OUD treatment. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with OIC stakeholders (n = 46) in 10 New York counties in the United States, including court coordinators, court case managers, and substance use disorder treatment clinic counselors, administrators, and peers. Interviews were recorded and transcribed and thematic analysis was conducted, guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework, employing both inductive and deductive coding. RESULTS: Results were conceptualized using EPIS inner (i.e., courts) and outer (i.e., OUD treatment providers) implementation contexts and bridging factors that impacted referral and engagement to OUD treatment from the OIC. Inner factors that facilitated OIC implementation included OIC philosophy (e.g., non-punitive, access-oriented), court organizational structure (e.g., strong court staff connectedness), and OIC court staff and client characteristics (e.g., positive medications for OUD [MOUD] attitudes). The latter two also served as barriers (e.g., lack of formalized procedures; stigma toward MOUD). Two outer context entities impacted OIC implementation as both barriers and facilitators: substance use disorder treatment programs (e.g., attitudes toward the OIC and MOUD; operational characteristics) and community environments (e.g., attitudes toward the opioid epidemic). The COVID-19 pandemic and bail reform were macro-outer context factors that negatively impacted OIC implementation. Facilitating bridging factors included staffing practices that bridged court and treatment systems (e.g., peers); barriers included communication and cultural differences between systems (e.g., differing expectations about OIC client success). CONCLUSIONS: This study identified key barriers and facilitators that OICs may consider as this model expands in the United States. Referral to and engagement in OUD treatment within the OIC context requires ongoing efforts to bridge the treatment and court systems, and reduce stigma around MOUD.

Technology Access and Perceptions of Telehealth Services Among Young Adults Involved in the Court System.

PURPOSE: This study examined access to technology and telehealth among young adults (ages 18-24) who were court-involved and were recruited from an alternative sentencing program in New York City. METHODS: Using sequential mixed methods design, we examined demographic factors linked with access to technology and perceived usefulness of the Internet among n = 321 young adults who were court-involved (75% male, 65% African American, 35% Latinx). We then conducted in-depth interviews with 27 young adults to elicit first-person account of their access to, interest in, and experience with technology and telehealth. RESULTS: Although most participants had access to a phone with a data plan, a substantial proportion reported inconsistent access to the technology critical to telehealth. Certain young adults were more likely to lack consistent access to the technology needed for telehealth, including Black young adults, males, those with less than a high school diploma, those with a history of homelessness, and those who had difficulties paying for basic necessities. Qualitative interviews revealed that most had a strong self-efficacy using technology, while distrust of technology, inexperience with and skepticism of telehealth, low perceived need for care, and medical mistrust were common significant barriers in this underserved population. DISCUSSION: Findings underscored the critical need to address medical mistrust and increase access to and utilization of care among young adults who are court-involved. Results can inform the development and implementation of interventions designed to improve accessibility and acceptability of telehealth.