Opioid agonist therapy during residential treatment of opioid use disorder: Cohort study on access and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine access to opioid agonist therapy (OAT) for those entering residential treatment for opioid use disorder; to report on treatment outcomes for those taking OAT and those not taking OAT; and to determine the association between OAT use and residential treatment completion. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with opioid use disorder admitted to publicly funded residential treatment programs in the province of Ontario between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Access to OAT during residential treatment using descriptive statistics. Treatment outcomes (ie, completed the program, voluntarily left early, involuntary discharged, and other) for the entire cohort and for the OAT and non-OAT groups using descriptive statistics. Association between OAT use at admission and treatment completion (a binary outcome) using bivariate and multivariate models. RESULTS: Among an identified cohort of 1910 patients with opioid use disorder, 52.8% entered programs that permitted access to OAT. Overall, 56.8% of patients completed treatment, 23.3% voluntarily left early (eg, were no-shows, dropped out), 17.0% were involuntarily discharged, and 2.9% were discharged early for other reasons. Those taking OAT were as likely to complete treatment as those not taking OAT (53.9% vs 57.5%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio of 1.07, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.38). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates 2 large gaps in care for patients with opioid use disorder. First, these patients have poor access to OAT-the first-line treatment of opioid use disorder-while in publicly funded residential treatment programs; and second, many are involuntarily discharged from treatment. Additionally, this study indicates that patients taking OAT have similar likelihood of completing residential treatment as those not taking OAT do. Limitations of this study are that it is based on observational data for patients who self-selected before admission to use OAT or not, and it is likely not all confounders were accounted for.

Advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care interventions for homeless people: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Homeless individuals have a high prevalence of multiple chronic comorbidities and early mortality compared to the general population. They also experience significant barriers to access and stigmatization in the healthcare system. Providing advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care for this underserved population is an important health issue. AIM: To summarize and evaluate the evidence surrounding advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care interventions for homeless persons. DESIGN: A systematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. DATA SOURCES: Articles from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PubMed databases were searched through 13 June 2015. Peer-reviewed studies that implemented advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care interventions for homeless populations were included. Data from studies were independently extracted by two investigators using pre-specified criteria, and quality was assessed using modified Cochrane and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tools. RESULTS: Six articles met inclusion criteria. Two studies were randomized controlled trials involving advance directive completion. Two cohort studies investigated the costs of a shelter-based palliative care intervention and predictors for completing advance directives. These studies were rated low to fair quality. Two qualitative studies explored the interface between harm-reduction services and end-of-life care and the conditions for providing palliative care for homeless persons in a support home. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care interventions for homeless individuals is uncertain. High-quality studies of interventions that reflect the unique and complex circumstances of homeless populations and investigate patient-related outcomes, caregiver burden, and cost-effectiveness are needed.