Opioid use, prescribing and fatal overdose patterns among racial/ethnic minorities in the United States: A scoping review and conceptual risk environment model.

ISSUES: To date, there has been no synthesis of research addressing the scale and nuances of the opioid epidemic in racial/ethnic minority populations in the United States that considers the independent and joint impacts of dynamics such as structural disadvantage, provider bias, health literacy, cultural norms and various other risk factors. APPROACH: Using the "risk environment" framework, we conducted a scoping review on PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar of peer-reviewed literature and governmental reports published between January 2000 and February 2024 on the nature and scale of opioid use, opioid prescribing patterns, and fatal overdoses among racial/ethnic minorities in the United States, while also examining macro, meso and individual-level risk factors. KEY FINDINGS: Results from this review illuminate a growing, but fragmented, literature lacking standardisation in racial/ethnic classification and case reporting, specifically in regards to Indigenous and Asian subpopulations. This literature broadly illustrates racial/ethnic minorities' increasing nonmedical use of opioids, heightened burdens of fatal overdoses, specifically in relation to polydrug use and synthetic opioids, with notable elevations among Black/Latino subgroups, in addition uneven opioid prescribing patterns. Moreover, the literature implicates a variety of unique risk environments corresponding to dynamics such as residential segregation, provider bias, overpolicing, acculturative stress, patient distrust, and limited access to mental health care services and drug treatment resources, including medications for opioid use disorder. IMPLICATIONS: There has been a lack of rigorous, targeted study on racial/ethnic minorities who use opioids, but evidence highlights burgeoning increases in usage, especially polydrug/synthetic opioid use, and disparities in prescriptions and fatal overdose risk-phenomena tied to multi-level forms of entrenched disenfranchisement. CONCLUSION: There is a need for further research on the complex, overlapping risk environments of racial/ethnic minorities who use opioids, including deeper inclusion of Indigenous and Asian individuals, and efforts to generate greater methodological synergies in population classification and reporting guidelines.

Impact of the Communities That HEAL Intervention on Buprenorphine-Waivered Practitioners and Buprenorphine Prescribing: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of the HCS Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Buprenorphine significantly reduces opioid-related overdose mortality. From 2002 to 2022, the Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (DATA 2000) required qualified practitioners to receive a waiver from the Drug Enforcement Agency to prescribe buprenorphine for treatment of opioid use disorder. During this period, waiver uptake among practitioners was modest; subsequent changes need to be examined. Objective: To determine whether the Communities That HEAL (CTH) intervention increased the rate of practitioners with DATA 2000 waivers and buprenorphine prescribing. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prespecified secondary analysis of the HEALing Communities Study, a multisite, 2-arm, parallel, community-level, cluster randomized, open, wait-list-controlled comparison clinical trial was designed to assess the effectiveness of the CTH intervention and was conducted between January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2023, in 67 communities in Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio, accounting for approximately 8.2 million adults. The participants in this trial were communities consisting of counties (n = 48) and municipalities (n = 19). Trial arm randomization was conducted using a covariate constrained randomization procedure stratified by state. Each state was balanced by community characteristics including urban/rural classification, fatal opioid overdose rate, and community population. Thirty-four communities were randomized to the intervention and 33 to wait-list control arms. Data analysis was conducted between March 20 and September 29, 2023, with a focus on the comparison period from July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2022. Intervention: Waiver trainings and other educational trainings were offered or supported by the HEALing Communities Study research sites in each state to help build practitioner capacity. Main Outcomes and Measures: The rate of practitioners with a DATA 2000 waiver (overall, and stratified by 30-, 100-, and 275-patient limits) per 100 000 adult residents aged 18 years or older during July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2022, were compared between the intervention and wait-list control communities. The rate of buprenorphine prescribing among those waivered practitioners was also compared between the intervention and wait-list control communities. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were performed. Results: A total of 8 166 963 individuals aged 18 years or older were residents of the 67 communities studied. There was no evidence of an effect of the CTH intervention on the adjusted rate of practitioners with a DATA 2000 waiver (adjusted relative rate [ARR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.94-1.14) or the adjusted rate of practitioners with a DATA 2000 waiver who actively prescribed buprenorphine (ARR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.86-1.10). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the CTH intervention was not associated with increases in the rate of practitioners with a DATA 2000 waiver or buprenorphine prescribing among those waivered practitioners. Supporting practitioners to prescribe buprenorphine remains a critical yet challenging step in the continuum of care to treat opioid use disorder. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04111939.

Community-level determinants of stakeholder perceptions of community stigma toward people with opioid use disorders, harm reduction services and treatment in the HEALing Communities Study.

BACKGROUND: Community stigma toward people with opioid use disorder (OUD) can impede access to harm reduction services and treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Such community OUD stigma is partially rooted in community-level social and economic conditions, yet there remains a paucity of large-scale quantitative data examining community-level factors associated with OUD stigma. We examined whether rurality, social inequity, and racialized segregation across communities from four states in the HEALing Communities Study (HCS) were associated with 1) greater perceived community stigma toward people treated for OUD, 2) greater perceived intervention stigma toward MOUD, and 3) greater perceived intervention stigma toward naloxone by community stakeholders in the HCS. METHODS: From November 2019-January 2020, a cross-sectional survey about community OUD stigma was administered to 801 members of opioid overdose prevention coalitions across 66 communities in four states prior to the start of HCS intervention activities. Bivariate analyses assessed pairwise associations between community rural/urban status and each of the three stigma variables, using linear mixed effect modeling to account for response clustering within communities, state, and respondent sociodemographic characteristics. We conducted similar bivariate analyses to assess pairwise associations between racialized segregation and social inequity. RESULTS: On average, the perceived community OUD stigma scale score of stakeholders from rural communities was 4% higher (ß=1.57, SE=0.7, p≤0.05), stigma toward MOUD was 6% higher (ß=0.28, SE=0.1, p≤0.05), and stigma toward naloxone was 10% higher (ß=0.46, SE=0.1, p≤0.01) than among stakeholders from urban communities. No significant differences in the three stigma variables were found among communities based on racialized segregation or social inequity. CONCLUSION: Perceived community stigma toward people treated for OUD, MOUD, and naloxone was higher among stakeholders in rural communities than in urban communities. Findings suggest that interventions and policies to reduce community-level stigma, particularly in rural areas, are warranted.

Intervention Adaptation and Implementation Method for Real-World Constraints and Using New Technologies.

Purpose: Rigorous adaptation methods are needed to revise existing evidence-based behavioral interventions for implementation for new target populations, revised/updated outcomes, new delivery modalities, recent advances, and new technologies. We describe an adaptation method designed to overcome the real-world challenges of having very limited existing expertise, resources, and time. Method: This adaptation method and accompanying visualization tool ("Deconstruction/Reconstruction Matrix") preserves theoretical mechanisms of behavior change, accounts for challenges in utilizing new technologies, and strengthens clinical processes, with an emphasis on safety. Results: The adaptation of an in-person HIV behavioral intervention for sexual and gender diverse men in Kazakhstan to one delivered remotely via telecommunication and social media technologies exemplifies the process and strengths of the method, concomitantly resulting in recommendations for adaptation and implementation of mobile health (mHealth) and digital health interventions. Discussion: This method allows researchers and clinicians to adapt interventions rapidly and rigorously and to benefit from new technologies.

Reproductive Life Goals: A Systematic Review of Pregnancy Planning Intentions, Needs, and Interventions Among Women Involved in U.S. Criminal Justice Systems.

Background: Women involved in criminal justice systems (WICJ) are affected by multilevel biological and sociocultural factors that result in adverse health outcomes and health disparities. Criminal justice systems (CJS) must be appropriately resourced to address these issues. Materials and Methods: We developed a systematic review to understand the intentions and needs for pregnancy prevention and planning among WICJ to inform future reproductive health services. We conducted a systematic literature review of epidemiologic and interventional studies that addressed the pregnancy prevention and planning needs of U.S. WICJ (2000-2019). An initial screen identified 7061 articles and 3 independent reviewers determined that 28 articles (16 descriptive studies in adults, 7 descriptive studies in adolescents, and 5 interventional studies) met inclusion criteria. Results: The literature review identified high rates of contraception underutilization and negative attitudes toward pregnancy among WICJ in a wide variety of settings. WICJ described minimal access to reproductive health services, including evidence-based contraception, and experienced high rates of unplanned and undesired pregnancies. Results were interpreted in the context of the reproductive justice (RJ) framework. Conclusions: The CJS, although not designed to provide health care, should dedicate resources to address the multilevel barriers to care experienced by women. WICJ require targeted, gender-responsive, trauma-informed pregnancy prevention and planning interventions that acknowledge the history of reproductive coercion in this population and address key aspects of RJ, including the right to and to not have a child.