Implementation of an office-based addiction treatment model for Medicaid enrollees: A mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are the most effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) but remain underutilized. To reduce barriers to MOUD prescribing and increase treatment access, New Jersey's Medicaid program implemented the Office-Based Addiction Treatment (OBAT) Program in 2019, which increased reimbursement for office-based buprenorphine prescribing and established newly reimbursable patient navigation services in OBAT clinics. Using a mixed-methods design, this study aimed to describe stakeholder experiences with the OBAT program and to assess implementation and uptake of the program. METHODS: This study used a concurrent, triangulated mixed-methods design, which integrated complementary qualitative (semi-structured interviews) and quantitative (Medicaid claims) data to gain an in-depth understanding of the implementation of the OBAT program. We elicited stakeholder perspectives through interviews with 22 NJ Medicaid MOUD providers and 8 policy key informants, and examined trends in OBAT program utilization using 2019-2020 NJ Medicaid claims for 5380 Medicaid enrollees who used OBAT services. We used cross-case analysis (provider interviews) and a case study approach (key informant interviews) in analyzing qualitative data, and calculated descriptive statistics and trends for quantitative data. RESULTS: Provider enrollment and utilization of OBAT services increased steadily during the first two years of program implementation. Interviewees reported that enhanced reimbursements for office-based MOUD incentivized greater MOUD prescribing, while coverage of patient navigation services improved patient care. Despite increasing enrollment in the OBAT program, the proportion of primary care physicians in the state who enrolled in the program remained limited. Key barriers to enrollment included: requirements for a patient navigator; concerns about administrative burdens and reimbursement delays from Medicaid; lack of awareness of the program; and beliefs that patients with OUD were better served in comprehensive care settings. Patient navigation was highlighted as a critical and valuable element of the program, but navigator enrollment and reimbursement challenges may have prevented greater uptake of this service. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an OBAT model that enhanced reimbursement and provided coverage for patient navigation likely expanded access to MOUD in NJ. Results support initiatives like the OBAT program in improving access to MOUD, but program adaptations, where feasible, could improve uptake and utilization.

Overdose education and naloxone distribution program design informed by people who use drugs and naloxone distributors.

People who use drugs (PWUD) are the most directly affected by the overdose epidemic. However, they are not often targets of overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs. Instead, these programs target friends or family members of people prescribed opioids or general community members. This study aimed to understand the perspectives of PWUD and community naloxone distributors on OEND program design. We used a community-based participatory research model to elucidate participant perspectives on what OEND programs should look like in the context of each individual's specific risk environment. We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with PWUD and naloxone distributors (n = 30) in New Brunswick and Newark, New Jersey between February and November of 2022. We analyzed interviews using thematic analysis and identified the following themes: increasing naloxone knowledge, peer-based naloxone access, increasing PWUD-informed OEND program design, and desired broader OEND program scope. All Participants knew what naloxone was and emphasized that naloxone needed to be ubiquitous in the community. Participants prioritized peer-based distribution, integrating distribution into community organizations, and addressing psychosocial issues related to naloxone administration and drug use. In summary, PWUD and community naloxone distributors emphasized peer-led community naloxone distribution that prioritized novel ways for PWUD to access naloxone. OEND program design should prioritize PWUD's perspectives and direct community naloxone distribution.

Opioid use disorder treatment and the role of New Jersey Medicaid policy changes: perspectives of office-based buprenorphine providers.

Background: In the US, seventy percent of drug-related deaths are attributed to opioids. In response to the ongoing opioid crisis, New Jersey's (NJ) Medicaid program implemented the MATrx model to increase treatment access for Medicaid participants with opioid use disorder (OUD). The model's goals include increasing the number of office-based treatment providers, enhancing Medicaid reimbursement for certain treatment services, and elimination of prior authorizations for OUD medications.Objectives: To explore office-based addiction treatment providers' experiences delivering care in the context of statewide policy changes and their perspectives on treatment access changes and remaining barriers.Methods: This qualitative study used purposive sampling to recruit office-based New Jersey medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) providers . Twenty-two providers (11 females, 11 males) discussed treatment experiences since the policy changes in 2019, including evaluations of the current state of OUD care in New Jersey and perceived outcomes of the MATrx model policy changes.Results: Providers reported the MOUD climate in NJ improved as Medicaid implemented policies intended to reduce barriers to care and increase treatment access. Elimination of prior authorizations was noted as important, as it reduced provider burden and allowed greater focus on care delivery. However, barriers remained, including stigma, pharmacy supply issues, and difficulty obtaining injectable or non-generic medication formulations.Conclusion: NJ policies may have improved access to care for Medicaid beneficiaries by reducing barriers to care and supporting providers in prescribing MOUD. Yet, stigma and lack of psychosocial supports still need to be addressed to further improve access and care quality.

Peer Health Navigation Experiences Before and After Prison Release Among People With Opioid Use Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Recently incarcerated people with opioid use disorder are at high risk of overdose and adverse outcomes as a result of biopsychosocial risk factors. Peer support models aiming to improve these outcomes have expanded in recent years. This qualitative study aimed to document participants' experiences with peer health navigation before and after prison release, examine participants' perspectives on the role of peer health navigators, and understand participants' views on service improvements. METHODS: The authors conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with 39 recipients of peer health navigation at release, 30 of whom also completed a follow-up interview 3 months later. Interviews were analyzed via cross-case analysis. RESULTS: Interviewees differently valued the various types of support they received. Participants appreciated working with someone with shared lived experience with whom they could establish a trusting relationship. Nevertheless, structural and policy barriers meant that certain key needs-such as housing and employment-could not always be met. CONCLUSIONS: Peer health navigators can connect participants to evidence-based treatment and help them address their psychosocial needs and develop skills to support long-term wellness. Further research is needed to assess the impact of peer health navigation on participant outcomes, such as overdose reduction, treatment engagement, and sustained recovery.

Impact of an osteopathic peer recovery coaching model on treatment outcomes in high-risk men entering residential treatment for substance use disorders.

CONTEXT: The United States has witnessed a disproportionate rise in substance use disorders (SUD) and co-occurring mental health disorders, paired with housing instability, especially among racially minoritized communities. Traditional in-patient residential treatment programs for SUD have proven inconsistent in their effectiveness in preventing relapse and maintaining attrition among these patient populations. There is evidence showing that peer recovery programs led by individuals who have lived experience with SUD can increase social support and foster intrinsic motivation within participants to bolster their recovery. These peer recovery programs, when coupled with a standardized training program for peer recovery coaches, may be very efficacious at improving patient health outcomes, boosting performance on Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) national outcome measures (NOMs), and helping participants build an overall better quality of life. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study is to highlight the efficacy of a peer recovery program, the Minority Aids Initiative, in improving health outcomes and associated NOMs in men with SUD and/or co-occurring mental health disorder. METHODS: Participants received six months of peer recovery coaching from trained staff. Sessions were guided by the Manual for Recovery Coaching and focused on 10 different domains of recovery. Participants and coaches set long-term goals and created weekly action plans to work toward them. Standardized assessments (SAMHSA's Government Performance and Results Act [GPRA] tool, Addiction Severity Index [ASI]) were administered by recovery coaches at intake and at the 6-month time point to evaluate participant progress. Analyses of participant recovery were carried out according to SAMHSA's six NOMs and assessed the outcomes of the intervention and their significance. RESULTS: A total of 115 participants enrolled in the program over a 2-year period. Among them, 53 were eligible for 6-month follow-up interviews. In total, 321 sessions were held, with an average of three sessions per participant. Participants showed marked improvement across five of the six NOMs at the end of the 6-month course and across all ASI outcomes, with the exception of three in which participants reported an absence or few symptoms at intake. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that participants receive benefits across nearly all NOM categories when paired with recovery coaches who are well trained in medication-assisted treatment (MAT) and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) over a 6-month period. We see the following: a higher rate of abstinence; increased housing stability; lower health, behavioral, and social consequences; lower depression and anxiety; longer participant-recovery coach exposure time; and higher follow-up rates. We hope that our results can contribute to advancements and greater acceptance in the implementation of peer recovery coaching as well as an improvement in the lives of the communities affected by substance use.

Medications for opioid use disorder in state prisons: Perspectives of formerly incarcerated persons.

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is common among incarcerated persons and risk of overdose and other adverse drug-related consequences is high after release. Recognizing their potential to reduce these risks, some correctional systems are expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study explored the experiences and perspectives of formerly incarcerated individuals on MOUD use while incarcerated and after release. Methods: We interviewed 53 individuals with self-reported OUD who were released from New Jersey state prisons. Interviews explored motivations to use MOUD while incarcerated and after release, and experiences with prison-based MOUD and transition to community-based care. We performed cross-case analysis to examine common and divergent perspectives across participants. Results: A common reason for accepting prerelease MOUD was recognition of its effectiveness in preventing drug use, overdose, and other drug-related consequences. Participants who chose not to use MOUD often were focused on being completely medication-free or saw themselves as having relatively low-risk of substance use after a prolonged period without opioid use. A few participants reported challenges related to prison-based MOUD, including logistical barriers, stigma, and once-daily buprenorphine dosing. Most participants effectively transitioned to community-based care, but challenges included insurance lapses and difficulty locating providers. Conclusions: Many formerly incarcerated persons with OUD recognize the value of MOUD in supporting recovery, but some hold negative views of MOUD or underestimate the likelihood that they will return to drug use. Patient education on risks of post-release overdose, the role of MOUD in mitigating risk, and MOUD options available to them could increase engagement. Participants' generally positive experiences with MOUD support the expansion of correctional MOUD programs.

Perspectives of opioid use disorder treatment providers during COVID-19: Adapting to flexibilities and sustaining reforms.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented temporary federal and state regulatory flexibilities that rapidly transformed medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment delivery. This study aimed to understand changes in treatment providers' care during COVID-19, provider experiences with the adaptations, and perceptions of which changes should be sustained long-term. METHODS: We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 20 New Jersey MOUD providers, purposively sampled to reflect diversity in provider setting, specialty, and other characteristics. Using a rapid analysis approach, we summarized content within interview domains and analyzed domains across participants for recurring concepts and themes. RESULTS: MOUD treatment practice changes taking place during the COVID-19 pandemic included a rapid shift from in-person care to telehealth, reduction in frequency of toxicology testing and psychosocial/counseling services, and modifications to prescription durations and take-home methadone supplies. Modifications to practice were positively received and reinforced a sense of autonomy for providers as well as enhancing the ability to provide patient-centered care. All respondents expressed support for making temporary regulatory flexibilities permanent, but differed in their implementation of the flexibilities and the extent to which they planned to modify their own practices long-term. CONCLUSION: Findings support sustaining temporary regulatory and payment changes to MOUD practice, which may have improved treatment access and allowed for more flexible, individually tailored patient care. Few negative, unintended consequences were reported by providers, but more research is needed to evaluate the patient experience with changes to practice during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Vaginal mucositis related to immunotherapy in endometrial cancer.

Immunotherapy, specifically immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPi), has revolutionized our approach to treating all solid tumors, including gynecologic malignancies. Compared to standard chemotherapy, the adverse events associated with immunotherapies, are often mild and localized, although more severe systemic responses can also occur. While dermatitisdermatitis is a most commonly reported side effect of ICPi therapy, cutaneous toxicities have a range of clinical manifestations and can provide a challenge in an otherwise favorable treatment protocol. There have been few documented cases of mucositis caused by ICPi therapy and to our knowledge, no documented case of an ICPi therapy causing vaginal mucositis. As such, we present a case of a patient with metastatic uterine serous carcinoma (USC) treated with immunotherapy, who developed grade 3 vaginal mucositis. This is a case presentation of a 67-year-old woman with a history of stage I metastatic uterine serous carcinoma who was initially treated with a hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and lymphadenectomy. Eight months after surgery, patient was found to have a vaginal recurrence treated with external beam radiation therapy and vaginal brachytherapy, as well as port site recurrence treated with resection and 6 cycles of systemic chemotherapy with Carboplatin and Paclitaxel. The patient was found to have progression of her disease and was treated with a combinatorial therapy using PD-L1 inhibitor and TK inhibitor. Patient tolerated first two cycles of treatment without severe side effects. Nine days after administration of the second cycle, the patient reported new onset of severe non-radiating vaginal and perineal pain, that worsened with sitting down, and was refractory to pain medications. Pelvic examination revealed multiple, deep, erythematous ulcerations on the vaginal mucosa involving the left and anterior vaginal introitus, distal vagina and necrosis around the periurethral area, consistent with grade 3 mucositis. The treatment was immediately discontinued, and the patient was started on prednisone 100 mg by mouth daily for 7 days, which was tapered over the course of 10 days and Gabapentin and Oxycodone were given for pain control. The patient started to report improvement in symptoms after 3 weeks and re-examination in 1 month showed decreased amount of fibrinous material involving 50% of the lesions, indicating that the initial grade 3 mucositis had improved to grade 1. As immunotherapy is becoming more widely used in gynecologic and other malignancies, providers need to be aware of rare but significant complications associated with these therapies. Such toxicities should be correctly identified and treated appropriately and expediently. Most patients will continue to benefit from administered immunotherapy and often times can be restarted once the toxicities are alleviated. To our knowledge, this is a first reported case of vaginal mucositis associated with immunotherapy treatment with ICPi in a patient with gynecologic malignancy.