Linkage to Care Outcomes Following Treatment in A Low-Threshold Substance Use Disorder Bridge Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for substance use disorders (SUD) remains low in the United States. To better meet needs of people who use alcohol and other drugs, low threshold bridge clinics which offer treatment without barrier and harm reduction services have gained prevalence. Bridge clinics work to surmount barriers to care by providing same day medication and treatment for SUD and eventually transitioning patients to community-based treatment providers. In this study, we examine SUD treatment outcomes among patients who transitioned out of a bridge clinic. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of posttreatment outcomes of patients seen at an urban medical center's bridge clinic between 2017 and 2022. The primary outcome was being in care anywhere at time of follow-up. We also examined the proportion of patients who completed each step of the cascade of care following transfer: connection to transfer clinic, completion of a clinic visit, retention in care, and medication use among those remaining in care at the transfer clinic. We examined the association of different bridge clinic services with still being in care anywhere and the association between successful transfer with being in care and taking medication at follow-up. RESULTS: Of 209 eligible participants, 63 were surveyed. Sixty-five percent of participants identified as male, 74% as white, 12% as Hispanic, 6% as Black, and 16% were unhoused. Most participants (78%) reported being connected to SUD treatment from the Bridge Clinic, and 37% remained in care at the same facility at the time of survey. Eighty-four percent reported being in treatment anywhere and 68% reported taking medication for SUD at follow-up, with most participants reporting taking buprenorphine (46%). CONCLUSION: Of those participants who transitioned out of a bridge clinic into community-based SUD care, 78% were successfully connected to ongoing care and 84% were still in care at follow-up.

Predictors of engagement and retention in care at a low-threshold substance use disorder bridge clinic.

INTRODUCTION: People with substance user disorder (SUD) have frequent intersections with the health care system; however, engagement and retention in SUD care remain low, particularly for marginalized populations. Low-threshold treatment models that aim to eliminate barriers to care are one proposed intervention to increase access and equity in SUD treatment. METHODS: This is a retrospective, cohort study of patients treated at a low-threshold bridge clinic from 2016 to 2021. The study's primary aim was to describe patient characteristics associated with engagement, defined as two or more completed visits, and treatment retention at 60 days, defined as a completed visit 45-to-75 days after first visit. A secondary outcome was transfer to ongoing treatment after bridge clinic. The study analyzed multivariable models assessing demographic and clinical predictors for each outcome using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: The study found that 1857 patients completed 2730 care episodes. The mean age was 38.7 years old, 70 % were male, 30 % female, 79 % White, 7 % Black, 9 % Latinx, and 97 % spoke English. Opioid use disorder (OUD) was the most common type of SUD, seen among 84 % of episodes, followed by alcohol (30 %), and stimulant use disorder (28 %). Seventy percent of bridge clinic episodes of care resulted in engagement, 38 % were retained at 60 days, and 28 % had transfer to care documented. In adjusted analyses, engagement was lower for Black patients compared to White patients and higher for patients who received buprenorphine or naltrexone. Retention for Black patients was also lower compared to White patients and higher for patients who were unhoused and patients who received buprenorphine or naltrexone. Transfer of care was more likely among patients who received buprenorphine. CONCLUSIONS: At a low-threshold bridge clinic 70 % of patients successfully engaged in care and 38 % were retained at two months. While OUD and AUD were most prevalent, stimulant use was common in this population. Patients who received buprenorphine or naltrexone had higher engagement, and retention, and those receiving buprenorphine also had higher care transfer. Black patients had lower rates of engagement and retention. Treatment providers need to adopt low-threshold SUD care models to eliminate racial disparities and address the needs of people using stimulants.

Peer recovery coaches in general medical settings: Changes in utilization, treatment engagement, and opioid use.

Recovery coaches, trained peers with a history of substance use disorder (SUD) who are formally embedded in the health care team, may be a cost-effective approach to support outpatient management of SUD treatment. Although recovery coach programs are scaling nationwide, limited data exist to support their impact on costs or clinical outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the integration of peer recovery coaches in general medical settings. Staff hired and trained nine recovery coaches as a part of a health system-wide effort to redesign SUD care. We examined reductions in acute care utilization and increases in outpatient treatment utilization among patients connected to a recovery coach. Additionally, we examined buprenorphine treatment engagement and opioid abstinence among a subset of patients who initiated buprenorphine prior to or within 30 days of their first recovery coach contact. We hypothesized recovery coach contact would strengthen outpatient SUD treatment and be associated with reductions in SUD severity and preventable acute care utilization. We included patients with an initial recovery coach contact between January 2015 and September 2017 in the main analyses (N = 1171). We assessed utilization outcomes via medical records over one year, comparing the six months before and after first recovery coach contact. We used chart review to extract toxicology results and buprenorphine treatment engagement for the subset of patients initiated on buprenorphine (n = 135). In the six months following recovery coach contact, there was a 44% decrease in patients hospitalized and a 9% decrease in patients with an ED visit. There was a 66% increase in outpatient utilization across primary care, community health center visits, mental health, and laboratory visits. Among patients who initiated buprenorphine, current recovery coach contact was associated with significantly increased odds of buprenorphine treatment engagement (OR = 1.89; 95% CI: 1.49-2.39; p < 0.001) and opioid abstinence (OR = 1.32; 95% CI: 1.02-1.70; p < 0.001). Recovery coaches may be an impactful and potentially cost-effective addition to an SUD care team, but future research is needed that uses a matched comparison condition.