Opioid Coprescription Through Risk Mitigation Guidance and Opioid Agonist Treatment Receipt.

Importance: At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government of British Columbia, Canada, released clinical guidance to support physicians and nurse practitioners in prescribing pharmaceutical alternatives to the toxic drug supply. These alternatives included opioids and other medications under the risk mitigation guidance (RMG), a limited form of prescribed safer supply, designed to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and harms associated with illicit drug use. Many clinicians chose to coprescribe opioid medications under RMG alongside opioid agonist treatment (OAT). Objective: To examine whether prescription of hydromorphone tablets or sustained-release oral morphine (opioid RMG) and OAT coprescription compared with OAT alone is associated with subsequent OAT receipt. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based, retrospective cohort study was conducted from March 27, 2020, to August 31, 2021, included individuals from 10 linked health administrative databases from British Columbia, Canada. Individuals who were receiving OAT at opioid RMG initiation and individuals who were receiving OAT and eligible but unexposed to opioid RMG were propensity score matched at opioid RMG initiation on sociodemographic and clinical variables. Data were analyzed between January 2023 and February 2024. Exposure: Opioid RMG receipt (≥4 days, 1-3 days, or 0 days of opioid RMG dispensed) in a given week. Main Outcome and Measures: The main outcome was OAT receipt, defined as at least 1 dispensed dose of OAT in the subsequent week. A marginal structural modeling approach was used to control for potential time-varying confounding. Results: A total of 4636 individuals (2955 [64%] male; median age, 38 [31-47] years after matching) were receiving OAT at the time of first opioid RMG dispensation (2281 receiving ongoing OAT and 2352 initiating RMG and OAT concurrently). Opioid RMG receipt of 1 to 3 days in a given week increased the probability of OAT receipt by 27% in the subsequent week (adjusted risk ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.25-1.30), whereas receipt of opioid RMG for 4 days or more resulted in a 46% increase in the probability of OAT receipt in the subsequent week (adjusted risk ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.43-1.49) compared with those not receiving opioid RMG. The biological gradient was robust to different exposure classifications, and the association was stronger among those initiating opioid RMG and OAT concurrently. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study, which acknowledged the intermittent use of both medications, demonstrated that individuals who were coprescribed opioid RMG had higher adjusted probability of continued OAT receipt or reengagement compared with those not receiving opioid RMG.

Matching study design to prescribing intention: The prevalent new-user design for studying abuse-deterrent formulations of opioids.

PURPOSE: In drug studies, research designs requiring no prior exposure to certain drug classes may restrict important populations. Since abuse-deterrent formulations (ADF) of opioids are routinely prescribed after other opioids, choice of study design, identification of appropriate comparators, and addressing confounding by "indication" are important considerations in ADF post-marketing studies. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study using claims data (2006-2018) from a North Carolina private insurer [NC claims] and Merative MarketScan [MarketScan], we identified patients (18-64 years old) initiating ADF or non-ADF extended-release/long-acting (ER/LA) opioids. We compared patient characteristics and described opioid treatment history between treatment groups, classifying patients as traditional (no opioid claims during prior six-month washout period) or prevalent new users. RESULTS: We identified 8415 (NC claims) and 147 978 (MarketScan) ADF, and 10 114 (NC claims) and 232 028 (MarketScan) non-ADF ER/LA opioid initiators. Most had prior opioid exposure (ranging 64%-74%), and key clinical differences included higher prevalence of recent acute or chronic pain and surgery among patients initiating ADFs compared to non-ADF ER/LA initiators. Concurrent immediate-release opioid prescriptions at initiation were more common in prevalent new users than traditional new users. CONCLUSIONS: Careful consideration of the study design, comparator choice, and confounding by "indication" is crucial when examining ADF opioid use-related outcomes.

Harm Reduction for Opioid Use Disorder: Strategies and Outcome Metrics.

Tweet: The authors discuss harm reduction strategies and associated outcome metrics in relation to the ongoing opioid crisis.

State-level policies and receipt of CDC-informed opioid thresholds among commercially insured new chronic opioid users.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association of state-level policies on receipt of opioid regimens informed by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) morphine milligram equivalent (MME)/day recommendations. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of new chronic opioid users (NCOUs). SETTING: Commercially insured plans across the United States using IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus for Academics database with new chronic use between January 2014 and March 2015. PARTICIPANTS: NCOUs with ≥60-day coverage of opioids within a 90-day period with ≥30-day opioid-free period prior to the date of the first qualifying opioid prescription. INTERVENTIONS: State-level policies including Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) robustness and cannabis policies involving the presence of medical dispensaries and state-wide decriminalization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: NCOUs were placed in three-tiered risk-based average MME/day thresholds: low (>0 to <50), medium (≥50 to <90), and high (≥90). Multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate the association of state-level policies with the thresholds while adjusting for relevant patient-specific factors. RESULTS: NCOUs in states with medium or high PDMP robustness had lower odds of receiving medium (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.74; 95 percent confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.69) and high (AOR 0.74; 95 percent CI: 0.59-0.92) thresholds. With respect to cannabis policies, NCOUs in states with medical cannabis dispensaries had lower odds of receiving high (AOR 0.75; 95 percent CI: 0.60-0.93) thresholds, while cannabis decriminalization had higher odds of receiving high (AOR 1.24; 95 percent CI: 1.04-1.49) thresholds. CONCLUSION: States with highly robust PDMPs and medical cannabis dispensaries had lower odds of receiving higher opioid thresholds, while cannabis decriminalization correlated with higher odds of receiving high opioid thresholds.

How do we understand the value of drug checking as a component of harm reduction services? A qualitative exploration of client and provider perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Mortality related to opioid overdose in the U.S. has risen sharply in the past decade. In California, opioid overdose death rates more than tripled from 2018 to 2021, and deaths from synthetic opioids such as fentanyl increased more than seven times in those three years alone. Heightened attention to this crisis has attracted funding and programming opportunities for prevention and harm reduction interventions. Drug checking services offer people who use drugs the opportunity to test the chemical content of their own supply, but are not widely used in North America. We report on qualitative data from providers and clients of harm reduction and drug checking services, to explore how these services are used, experienced, and considered. METHODS: We conducted in-depth semi-structured key informant interviews across two samples of drug checking stakeholders: "clients" (individuals who use drugs and receive harm reduction services) and "providers" (subject matter experts and those providing clinical and harm reduction services to people who use drugs). Provider interviews were conducted via Zoom from June-November, 2022. Client interviews were conducted in person in San Francisco over a one-week period in November 2022. Data were analyzed following the tenets of thematic analysis. RESULTS: We found that the value of drug checking includes but extends well beyond overdose prevention. Participants discussed ways that drug checking can fill a regulatory vacuum, serve as a tool of informal market regulation at the community level, and empower public health surveillance systems and clinical response. We present our findings within three key themes: (1) the role of drug checking in overdose prevention; (2) benefits to the overall agency, health, and wellbeing of people who use drugs; and (3) impacts of drug checking services at the community and systems levels. CONCLUSION: This study contributes to growing evidence of the effectiveness of drug checking services in mitigating risks associated with substance use, including overdose, through enabling people who use and sell drugs to test their own supply. It further contributes to discussions around the utility of drug checking and harm reduction, in order to inform legislation and funding allocation.

Perioperative pain optimization in the age of the opioid epidemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The opioid epidemic remains a constant and increasing threat to our society with overdoses and overdose deaths rising significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Growing evidence suggests a link between perioperative opioid use, postoperative opioid prescribing, and the development of opioid use disorder (OUD). As a result, strategies to better optimize pain management during the perioperative period are urgently needed. The purpose of this review is to summarize the most recent multimodal analgesia (MMA) recommendations, summarize evidence for efficacy surrounding the increased utilization of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, and discuss the implications for rising use of buprenorphine for OUD patients who present for surgery. In addition, this review will explore opportunities to expand our treatment of complex patients via transitional pain services. RECENT FINDINGS: There is ample evidence to support the benefits of MMA. However, optimal drug combinations remain understudied, presenting a target area for future research. ERAS protocols provide a more systematic and targeted approach for implementing MMA. ERAS protocols also allow for a more comprehensive approach to perioperative pain management by necessitating the involvement of surgical specialists. Increasingly, OUD patients taking buprenorphine are presenting for surgery. Recent guidance from a multisociety OUD working group recommends that buprenorphine not be routinely discontinued or tapered perioperatively. Lastly, there is emerging evidence to justify the use of transitional pain services for more comprehensive treatment of complex patients, like those with chronic pain, preoperative opioid tolerance, or substance use disorder. SUMMARY: Perioperative physicians must be aware of the impact of the opioid epidemic and explore methods like MMA techniques, ERAS protocols, and transitional pain services to improve the perioperative pain experience and decrease the risks of opioid-related harm.

Strengthening Protocols for Rapid Response to Disruptions in Access to Prescription Opioids: Considerations for State and Territorial Health Agencies.

Prescription opioid disruptions pose a danger and lead to adverse health outcomes for patients taking prescription opioids for pain or medication for opioid use disorder. State and territorial health agencies are uniquely positioned to respond to disruptions and potentially prevent risks associated with service disruptions. Responding to disruptions in access to prescription opioids necessitates a multifaceted, collaborative approach that prioritizes care continuity and patient well-being. State and territorial health agencies may benefit from developing and exercising a formal response protocol that outlines roles and activities during these types of events, strengthening capacity to rapidly respond and serve patient needs.

Substance use patterns, sociodemographics, and health profiles of harm reduction service recipients in Burlington, Vermont.

BACKGROUND: Understanding current substance use practices is critical to reduce and prevent overdose deaths among individuals at increased risk including persons who use and inject drugs. Because individuals participating in harm reduction and syringe service programs are actively using drugs and vary in treatment participation, information on their current drug use and preferred drugs provides a unique window into the drug use ecology of communities that can inform future intervention services and treatment provision. METHODS: Between March and June 2023, 150 participants in a harm reduction program in Burlington, Vermont completed a survey examining sociodemographics; treatment and medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) status; substance use; injection information; overdose information; and mental health, medical, and health information. Descriptive analyses assessed overall findings. Comparisons between primary drug subgroups (stimulants, opioids, stimulants-opioids) of past-three-month drug use and treatment participation were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Most participants reported being unhoused or unstable housing (80.7%) and unemployed (64.0%) or on disability (21.3%). The drug with the greatest proportion of participants reporting past three-month use was crack cocaine (83.3%). Fentanyl use was reported by 69.3% of participants and xylazine by 38.0% of participants. High rates of stimulant use were reported across all participants independent of whether stimulants were a participant's primary drug. Fentanyl, heroin, and xylazine use was less common in the stimulants subgroup compared to opioid-containing subgroups (p < .001). Current- and past-year MOUD treatment was reported by 58.0% and 77.3% of participants. Emergency rooms were the most common past-year medical treatment location (48.7%; M = 2.72 visits). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate high rates of polysubstance use and the underrecognized effects of stimulant use among people who use drugs-including its notable and increasing role in drug-overdose deaths. Crack cocaine was the most used stimulant, a geographical difference from much of the US where methamphetamine is most common. With the increasing prevalence of fentanyl-adulterated stimulants and differences in opioid use observed between subgroups, these findings highlight the importance and necessity of harm reduction interventions (e.g., drug checking services, fentanyl test strips) and effective treatment for individuals using stimulants alongside MOUD treatment.

Piloting an Opioid Risk Screening Tool in Clinical Practice.

Background: Despite much research and many interventions, the opioid epidemic continues to plague the United States. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2021), 136 people die daily from both prescription and illicit opioids. Objective: The goal of this pilot quality improvement project is to examine how the implementation of the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) in clinical practice might impact the beliefs and attitudes of nurse practitioners (NPs) toward prescribing opioid therapy. Methods: A pre-post design was utilized. A convenience sample recruited participants from a private NP Facebook group. The intervention included a prerecorded presentation on the ORT and the use of the ORT for 8 weeks. Results: While 46 NPs completed the presurvey, only 19 NPs completed the postsurvey. Statistical results did not yield significance, but there were several significant clinical trends discovered. Conclusion: Utilizing the ORT to screen for opioid misuse risks has been shown to improve providers' confidence in opioid prescribing. ORT guides providers in discerning patient risk for developing dependence on opioids. Implications for Nursing: Screening for opioid misuse risk is feasible. ORT adds to the clinical context in deciding a course of treatment in pain management.

Opioid stewardship program implementation in rural and critical access hospitals in Arizona.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to examine rural hospitals' status in implementing opioid stewardship program (OSP) elements and assess differences in implementation in emergency department (ED) and acute inpatient departments. DESIGN: Health administrator survey to identify the number and type of OSP elements that each hospital has implemented. SETTING: Arizona critical access hospitals (CAHs). PARTICIPANTS: ED and acute inpatient department heads at 17 Arizona CAHs (total of 34 assessments). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Implementation of 11 OSP elements, by department (ED vs inpatient) and prevention orientation (primary vs tertiary). RESULTS: The percentage of implemented elements ranged from 35 to 94 percent in EDs and 24 to 88 percent in acute care departments. Reviewing the prescription drug monitoring program database and offering alternatives to opioids were the most frequently implemented. Assessing opioid use disorder (OUD) and prescribing naloxone were among the least. The number of implemented elements tended to be uniform across departments. We found that CAHs implemented, on average, 67 percent of elements that prevent unnecessary opioid use and 54 percent of elements that treat OUD. CONCLUSIONS: Some OSP elements were in place in nearly every Arizona CAH, while others were present in only a quarter or a third of hospitals. To improve, more attention is needed to define and standardize OSPs. Equal priority should be given to preventing unnecessary opioid initiation and treating opioid misuse or OUD, as well as quality control strategies that provide an opportunity for continuous improvement.

The development of a recovery coaching training curriculum to facilitate linkage to and increase retention on medications for opioid use disorder.

Introduction: Medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) decreases opioid overdose risk and is the standard of care for persons with opioid use disorder (OUD). Recovery coach (RC)-led programs and associated training curriculums to improve outcomes around MOUD are limited. We describe our comprehensive training curriculum including instruction and pedagogy for novel RC-led MOUD linkage and retention programs and report on its feasibility. Methods­pedagogy and training development: The Kentucky HEALing (Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM) Communities Study (HCS) created the Linkage and Retention RC Programs with a local recovery community organization, Voices of Hope-Lexington. RCs worked to reduce participant barriers to entering or continuing MOUD, destigmatize and educate on MOUD and harm reduction (e.g., safe injection practices), increase recovery capital, and provide opioid overdose education with naloxone distribution (OEND). An extensive hybrid (in-person and online, both synchronous and asynchronous), inclusive learning-focused curriculum to support the programs (e.g., motivational interviewing sessions, role plays, MOUD competency assessment, etc.,) was created to ensure RCs developed the necessary skills and could demonstrate competency before deployment in the field. The curriculum, pedagogy, learning environment, and numbers of RCs trained and community venues receiving a trained RC are reported, along with interviews from three RCs about the training program experience. Results: The curriculum provides approximately 150 h of training to RCs. From December 2020 to February 2023, 93 RCs and 16 supervisors completed the training program; two were unable to pass a final competency check. RCs were deployed at 45 agencies in eight Kentucky HCS counties. Most agencies (72%) sustained RC services after the study period ended through other funding sources. RCs interviewed reported that the training helped them better explain and dispel myths around MOUD. Conclusion: Our novel training and MOUD programs met a current unmet need for the RC workforce and for community agencies. We were able to train and deploy RCs successfully in these new programs aimed at saving lives through improving MOUD linkage and retention. This paper addresses a need to enhance the training requirements around MOUD for peer support specialists.

"I go out of my way to give them an extra smile now:" A study of pharmacists who participated in Respond to Prevent, a community pharmacy intervention to accelerate provision of harm reduction materials.

BACKGROUND: Community pharmacies are well-positioned to improve the health of people with opioid use disorder and who use drugs by providing naloxone and other essential public health supplies. Respond to Prevent (R2P) is a clinical trial which sought to accelerate provision of harm reduction materials through a multicomponent intervention that included in-store materials, online training, and academic detailing. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to explore pharmacists' attitudes, knowledge, and experiences in providing naloxone, dispensing buprenorphine, and selling nonprescription syringes following participation in the R2P program. METHODS: Two online asynchronous focus groups were conducted with community-based chain pharmacists across Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Washington who had participated in the R2P program. Participants accessed an online repository of group interview items and responded to questions over a short period. Each pharmacist participated anonymously for approximately 30 min over 2 ½ days. Pharmacists answered questions on experiences with pharmacy-based harm reduction care and R2P intervention implementation barriers and facilitators. Qualitative data analysis was conducted by a multidisciplinary team using an immersion-crystallization approach. RESULTS: A total of 32 pharmacists participated in the two focus groups. Most participants were female (n = 18, 56%), non-Hispanic (n = 29, 91%), and white (n = 17, 53%). Four major themes were identified related to (1) addressing bias and stigma toward people with opioid use disorder and who use drugs, (2) familiarity and comfort with naloxone provision, (3) perspective and practice shifts in nonprescription syringe sales, (4) structural challenges to harm reduction care in the pharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacists across the four states identified attitudes, knowledge, and experiences that create barriers to providing care to people with opioid use disorder and who use drugs. R2P approaches and tools were effective at reducing stigma and changing attitudes but were less effective at addressing structural challenges from the pharmacists' perspective.