OUD Care Service Improvement with Prolonged-release Buprenorphine in Prisons: Cost Estimation Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In prisons in England, integrated treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is accessible and effective, commonly based on daily supervised consumption of methadone. Treatment limitations (inadequate dosing, nonengagement with care, stigma, diversion and bullying) are noted. Flexible dose, injectable prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) which removes the need for daily dispensing and supervision is suggested for prisoner care. This work aimed to predict the difference in costs of current standard of care vs partial introduction of PRB. METHODS: A predictive model of compared costs for the provision of OUD care in the prison setting in England evaluated current standard of care (all receive methadone) with a future situation of 30% of prisoners electing to use a monthly dose of PRB. Evidence describing costs to deliver OUD care for 150 prisoners (pharmacotherapy, direct service, indirect health care, indirect security costs) were collected, including assumptions describing how care would be delivered. Evidence sources include national data sources, scientific literature and from experience in the prison health care setting. RESULTS: For a representative standard prison population requiring OUD care of 150 prisoners in England PRB introduction is associated with a predicted reduction in direct and indirect costs of OUD care. Annual OUD care costs for current standard of care were £0.6M; with 30% PRB costs reduced by £8665, more than 3000 hours of staff time is saved. Sensitivity analyses showed greater adoption of PRB resulted in further cost reduction. CONCLUSION: PRB can address limitations of OUD care in prisons and improve outcomes. Introduction does not increase cost of care in this predictive analysis. PRB may lead the transformation of prisoner OUD care.

Budget Impact Analysis of the Introduction of Injectable Prolonged-Release Buprenorphine on Opioid Use Disorder Care Resource Requirements.

OBJECTIVE: To assess budget impact of the introduction of prolonged-release buprenorphine (PRB) for care of opioid use disorder (OUD) over 1 year in a defined population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A healthcare perspective, decision-tree model analysis of the cost of OUD care for a standard population was prepared to compare two scenarios: treatment of a population under the existing standard of care, or with the addition of PRB. The model assessed OUD-related direct costs (medication, delivery, psychosocial treatment), other services costs (harm reduction, general healthcare, social and justice services) and the impact of behaviors such as engaging with treatment and electing to use additional opioids "on top" of treatment regimens, and "dropping out" from treatment. RESULTS: Standard population definition (persons offered OUD care services) is based on a typical administrative region in England with general population of 400,000 citizens, 1,777 high-risk opioid users requiring treatment and 909 patients initiating treatment in a year. The cost to provide OUD care for 1 year under the current scenario (70% treated with methadone, 30% sublingual buprenorphine) is £19.7M. In scenarios with increased PRB adoption/reduced sublingual buprenorphine or oral methadone use, the cost reduction ranges from £0.2M to 0.7M. CONCLUSION: The assessment showed a reduction of overall costs after introduction of PRB.

Housing for People with Substance Use Disorders: One Size Does Not Fit All Tenants-Assessment of 16 Housing Services and Suggestions for Improvement Based on Real World Experience.

Housing is an important factor for individuals addressing substance use disorders (SUD). This work compared aims and outcomes for new housing services and made suggestions for improvement. 16 new services were assessed over 6 months activity against factors identified as important. Services defined expected standards including (1) engagement with treatment for SUD, (2) restrictions on continuing substance use by tenants. After 6 months, 9 (56%) housing projects did not achieve planned standards and lowered criteria for inclusion. When setting up housing for people with SUD it is important to define clearly the nature of the intended service. Different types of housing programs in a network are needed to meet the evolving behaviour of tenants. One size does not fit all. Stable housing is important for people addressing SUD and these suggestions may increase the chance of providing a suitable foundation for people in need.

Current and future options for opioid use disorder: a survey assessing real-world opinion of service users on novel therapies including depot formulations of buprenorphine.

PURPOSE: Integrated treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) includes opioid agonist therapy (OAT) such as methadone and buprenorphine with well-evidenced benefits. Treatment with typical existing oral medications is associated with burdens and limits to successful outcomes (frequent dosing, attendance for collection/consumption, difficulty in achieving optimal dosing, misuse, diversion, accidental exposure, and stigma from the treatment process). Novel medications include injected depot formulations with less frequent administration, providing consistent drug levels after dosing. This survey assesses the opinion of those with OUD treatment services lived experience to inform future medication choices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A survey of people with experience of OUD pharmacotherapy - the treatment system - was completed. Participants reviewed statements describing elements of OUD care using 7-point Likert scales to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement. Data were assessed using descriptive analysis. RESULTS: In total, 35 people (16 in treatment; 19 with previous history of treatment) completed the survey. Average drug-use duration, 20 years, commonly included injected opioids. The majority agreed treatment was effective, but not tailored to their individual needs and limited normal day-to-day activities. Opinions on novel depot medications included the following: agreement on its potential to make life easier, reduce stigma, free-up time for preferred activities. Participants did not report concerns over the effectiveness and safety of depot medications, nor about reduced contact with treatment services that could be associated with less frequent dosing. CONCLUSION: This survey provides a useful initial record of the opinions of people experienced in OUD treatment services on novel depot medications, which may result in important benefits. Care providers and policy makers should continue to work with those with lived experience to understand the specific opportunity provided by such innovation.