Transitions of care between jail-based medications for opioid use disorder and ongoing treatment in the community: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Offering medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in carceral settings significantly reduces overdose. However, it is unknown to what extent individuals in jails continue MOUD once they leave incarceration. We aimed to assess the relationship between in-jail MOUD and MOUD continuity in the month following release. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of linked NYC jail-based electronic health records and community Medicaid OUD treatment claims for individuals with OUD discharged from jail between 2011 and 2017. We compared receipt of MOUD within 30 days of release, among those with and without MOUD at release from jail. We tested for effect modification based on MOUD receipt prior to incarceration and assessed factors associated with treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: Of 28,298 eligible incarcerations, 52.8 % received MOUD at release. 30 % of incarcerations with MOUD at release received community-based MOUD within 30 days, compared to 7 % of incarcerations without MOUD (Risk Ratio: 2.62 (2.44-2.82)). Most (69 %) with MOUD claims prior to incarceration who received in-jail MOUD continued treatment in the community, compared to 9 % of those without prior MOUD. Those who received methadone (vs. buprenorphine), were younger, Non-Hispanic Black and with no history of MOUD were less likely to continue MOUD following release. CONCLUSIONS: MOUD maintenance in jail is strongly associated with MOUD continuity upon release. Still, findings highlight a gap in treatment continuity upon-reentry, especially among those who initiate MOUD in jail. In the wake of worsening overdose deaths and troubling disparities, improving MOUD continuity among this population remains an urgent priority.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Heroin, Methamphetamine, and Cocaine Use, Treatment, and Mortality Trends in 3 National Data Sources-United States, 2010-2019.

BACKGROUND: As overdose deaths continue to rise, public health officials need comprehensive surveillance data to design effective prevention, harm reduction, and treatment strategies. Disparities across race and ethnicity groups, as well as trends in substance use, treatment, or overdose deaths, have been examined individually, but reports rarely compare findings across multiple substances or data sources. OBJECTIVE: To provide a broad assessment of the overdose crisis, we describe trends in substance use, treatment, and overdose mortality across racial and ethnic groups for multiple substances. RESEARCH DESIGN: We conducted a longitudinal, cross-sectional analysis comparing trends. SUBJECTS: We identified self-reported use from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, substance use treatment admissions from the Treatment Episode Data Set-Admissions, and overdose deaths from the CDC's Multiple Cause of Death files. MEASURES: We measured rates of substance use, treatment, and deaths involving heroin, methamphetamine, and cocaine among United States adults from 2010 to 2019. RESULTS: Heroin, methamphetamine, and cocaine use increased, though not all changes were statistically significant. Treatment admissions indicating heroin and methamphetamine increased while admissions indicating cocaine decreased. Overdose deaths increased among all groups: methamphetamine (257%-1,115%), heroin (211%-577%), and cocaine (88%-259%). Changes in rates of use, treatment, and death for specific substances varied by racial and ethnic group. CONCLUSIONS: Substance use, treatment, and overdose mortality changed considerably, though not always equivalently. Identifying diverging trends in substance-related measures for specific substances and racial and ethnic groups can inform targeted investment in treatment to reduce disparities and respond to emerging changes in the overdose crisis.

Understanding Regional Patterns of Overdose Deaths Related to Opioids and Psychostimulants.

BACKGROUND: As overdose rates increase for multiple substances, policymakers need to identify geographic patterns of substance-specific deaths. In this study, we describe county-level opioid and psychostimulant overdose patterns and how they correlate with county-level social vulnerability measures. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study, we used nationwide 2016-2018 restricted access Centers for Disease Prevention and Control county-level mortality files for 1,024 counties. We estimated quartiles of opioid and psychostimulant overdose mortality and provided estimates of their association with county-level Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) percentile. RESULTS: There was high opioid and psychostimulant overdose mortality in the Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, East North Central, and Mountain regions. The Central US had the lowest opioid and psychostimulant overdose mortality rates. Counties with higher SVI scores (i.e. higher social vulnerability) were significantly more likely to experience high opioid and high psychostimulant overdose (high-high) mortality. A 10-percentile increase in SVI score was associated with a 3.1 percentage point increase in the likelihood of being a high-high county (p < 0.001) in unadjusted models and a 1.5 percentage point increase (p < 0.05) in models adjusting for region. CONCLUSION: Our results illustrated the heterogenous geographic distribution of the growing concurrent opioid and psychostimulant overdose crisis. The substantial regional variation we identified highlights the need for local data to guide policymaking and treatment planning. The association of opioid-psychostimulant overdose mortality with social vulnerability demonstrates the critical need in impacted counties for tailored treatment that addresses the complex medical and social needs of people who use both opioids and psychostimulants.

Treatment setting among individuals with opioid use and criminal legal involvement, housing instability, or Medicaid insurance, 2015-2021.

Background: Individuals with criminal legal involvement (CLI), housing instability, or Medicaid insurance may experience barriers accessing substance use treatment in certain settings. Previous research has found individuals in these groups are less likely to receive medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), but the role treatment setting may play in low rates of MOUD is unclear. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study using nationally representative survey data from 2015 to 2021. We estimated the proportion of individuals who had CLI, housing instability, or Medicaid insurance who received substance use treatment in a variety of settings. We used multivariable logistic regressions to estimate the associations between group and the receipt of MOUD across treatment settings. Results: Individuals with CLI, housing instability, or Medicaid insurance were more likely to receive substance use treatment in hospitals, rehabilitation, and mental health facilities compared with individuals not in these groups. However, all groups accessed substance use treatment in doctors' offices at similar rates. Treatment at a doctor's office was associated with the highest likelihood of receiving MOUD (aOR 4.73 [95% CI: 2.2.15-10.43]). Across multiple treatment settings, Individuals with CLI or housing instability were less likely to receive MOUD. Conclusions: Individuals with CLI, housing instability, or Medicaid insurance are more likely to access substance use treatment at locations associated with lower rates of MOUD use. MOUD access across treatment settings is needed to improve engagement and retention in treatment for patients experiencing structural disadvantage or who have low incomes.

Emergency Physician Observations and Attitudes on Law Enforcement Activities in the Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: Law enforcement officers (LEO) interact with patients and clinicians in the emergency department (ED) for many reasons. There is no current consensus on what should comprise, or how to best enact, guidelines that ideally balance LEO activities in the service of public safety with patient health, autonomy, and privacy. The purpose of this study was to explore how a national sample of emergency physicians (EP) perceives activities of LEOs during the delivery of emergency medical care. METHODS: Members of the Emergency Medicine Practice Research Network (EMPRN) were recruited via an email-delivered, anonymous survey that elicited experiences, perceptions, and knowledge of policies that guide interactions with LEOs in the ED. The survey included multiple-choice items, which we analyzed descriptively, and open-ended questions, which we analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Of 765 EPs in the EMPRN, 141 (18.4%) completed the survey. Respondents represented diverse locations and years in practice. A total of 113 (82%) respondents were White, and 114 (81%) were male. Over a third reported LEO presence in the ED on a daily basis. A majority (62%) perceived LEO presence as helpful for clinicians and clinical practice. When asked about the factors deemed highly important in allowing LEOs to access patients during care, 75% reported patients' potential as a threat to public safety. A small minority of respondents (12%) considered the patients' consent or preference to interact with LEOs. While 86% of EPs felt that information-gathering by LEO was appropriate in the ED setting, only 13% were aware of policy to guide these decisions. Perceived barriers to implementation of policy in this area included: issues of enforcement; leadership; education; operational challenges; and potential negative consequences. CONCLUSION: Future research is warranted to explore how policies and practices that guide intersections between emergency medical care and law enforcement impact patients, clinicians, and the communities that health systems serve.

State level variation in substance use treatment admissions among criminal legal-referred individuals.

BACKGROUND: Individuals involved in the criminal legal system face unique challenges to accessing substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, yet state-level variation in referrals for treatment remains largely unknown. To address disparities in the overdose crisis among individuals with criminal legal involvement, it is important to understand variation in SUD treatment across states. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective comparison of substance use treatment referrals from the criminal legal system and other sources across participating states. Using data from the 2018-2019 Treatment Episode Dataset-Admissions, we characterized treatment referral rates from the criminal legal system, the substances most commonly leading to treatment, and rates of treatment with medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) across states. RESULTS: Across all states, criminal legal referral rates were higher than non-criminal legal rates. Criminal-legal referral rates, adjusted for state overdose deaths, were highest in the Northeast and Midwest. Methamphetamine use was the most common substance leading to treatment referral from the criminal legal system in 24 states while opioid use was the most common reason for non-criminal legal referrals in 34 states. In over half the states analyzed, fewer than 10% of opioid treatment referrals from the criminal legal system received MOUD. In almost all states, MOUD was more common in treatment referred from non-criminal legal settings. CONCLUSION: State-specific policies and practices shape drug policy and the SUD treatment landscape for people with criminal legal involvement. Standards and ongoing monitoring for substance use treatment referrals from the criminal-legal system should be considered by federal agencies charged with addressing the ongoing overdose crisis.

WOMen profEssioNal developmenT oUtcome Metrics in Academic Emergency Medicine: Results from the WOMENTUM Modified Delphi Study.

INTRODUCTION: To address persistent gender inequities in academic medicine, women professional development groups (PDG) have been developed to support the advancement of women in medicine. While these programs have shown promising outcomes, long-term evaluative metrics do not currently exist. The objective of this study was to establish metrics to assess women's PDGs. METHODS: This was a modified Delphi study that included an expert panel of current and past emergency department (ED) chairs and Academy for Women in Academic Emergency Medicine (AWAEM) presidents. The panel completed three iterative surveys to develop and rank metrics to assess women PDGs. Metrics established by the expert panel were also distributed for member-checking to women EM faculty. RESULTS: The expert panel ranked 11 metrics with high to moderate consensus ranking with three metrics receiving greater than 90% consensus: gender equity strategy and plan; recruitment; and compensation. Members ranked 12 metrics with high consensus with three metrics receiving greater than 90% consensus: gender equity strategy and plan; compensation; and gender equity in promotion rates among faculty. Participants emphasized that departments should be responsible for leading gender equity efforts with PDGs providing a supportive role. CONCLUSION: In this study, we identified metrics that can be used to assess academic EDs' gender equity initiatives and the advisory efforts of a departmental women's PDG. These metrics can be tailored to individual departmental/institutional needs, as well as to a PDG's mission. Importantly, PDGs can use metrics to develop and assess programming, acknowledging that many metrics are the responsibility of the department rather than the PDG.

A Brief Educational Intervention to Increase ED Initiation of Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD).

BACKGROUND: Despite the evidence in support of the use of buprenorphine in the treatment of OUD and increasing ability of emergency medicine (EM) clinicians to prescribe it, emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine is uncommon. Many EM clinicians lack training on how to manage acute opioid withdrawal or initiate treatment with buprenorphine. We developed a brief buprenorphine training program and assessed the impact of the training on subsequent buprenorphine initiation and knowledge retention. METHODS: We conducted a pilot randomized control trial enrolling EM clinicians to receive either a 30-min didactic intervention about buprenorphine (standard arm) or the didactic plus weekly messaging and a monetary inducement to administer and report buprenorphine use (enhanced arm). All participants were incentivized to complete baseline, immediate post-didactic, and 90-day knowledge and attitude assessment surveys. Our objective was to achieve first time ED buprenorphine prescribing events in clinicians who had not previously prescribed buprenorphine in the ED and to improve EM-clinician knowledge and perceptions about ED-initiated buprenorphine. We also assessed whether the incentives and reminder messaging in the enhanced arm led to more clinicians administering buprenorphine than those in the standard arm following the training; we measured changes in knowledge of and attitudes toward ED-initiated buprenorphine. RESULTS: Of 104 EM clinicians enrolled, 51 were randomized to the standard arm and 53 to the enhanced arm. Clinical knowledge about buprenorphine improved for all clinicians immediately after the didactic intervention (difference 19.4%, 95% CI 14.4% to 24.5%). In the 90 days following the intervention, one-third (33%) of all participants reported administering buprenorphine for the first time. Clinicians administered buprenorphine more frequently in the enhanced arm compared to the standard arm (40% vs. 26.3%, p = 0.319), but the difference was not statistically significant. The post-session knowledge improvement was not sustained at 90 days in the enhanced (difference 9.6%, 95% CI - 0.37% to 19.5%) or in the standard arm (difference 3.7%, 95% CI - 5.8% to 13.2%). All the participants reported an increased ability to recognize patients with opioid withdrawal at 90 days (enhanced arm difference .55, 95% CI .01-1.09, standard arm difference .85 95% CI .34-1.37). CONCLUSIONS: A brief educational intervention targeting EM clinicians can be utilized to achieve first-time prescribing and improve knowledge around buprenorphine and opioid withdrawal. The use of weekly messaging and gain-framed incentivization conferred no additional benefit to the educational intervention alone. In order to further expand evidence-based ED treatment of OUD, focused initiatives that improve clinician competence with buprenorphine should be explored. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03821103.

Racial disparities in the management of emergency department patients presenting with psychiatric disorders.

PURPOSE: Emergency departments (ED) provide critical resources including stabilization, diagnosis of underlying medical precipitants and transfer to psychiatric hospitals for mental health emergencies. Our objective was to examine the association of race and/or ethnicity and the administration of chemcial sedation using a nationally representative sample of ED visits for psychiatric disorders. METHODS: We analyzed data from 2008 to 2018 through the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Survey database, a national probability survey based on ED chart abstraction. All ED visits for psychiatric disorders were included. Our primary outcome variable was receipt of chemical sedation among patients presenting with a complaint related to a psychiatric condition. We defined receipt of chemical sedation by the receipt of a first or second-generation antipsychotic or ketamine that was given in the ED. Our secondary outcome was receipt of psychiatric treatment defined as admission to a mental health and/or detox unit at the same hospital or transfer to a psychiatric facility. We used logistic regression models and used marginal effects to report the average adjusted probability in outcomes for different patient characteristics. RESULTS: Nationally after weighting, 76,200,000 of 1,480,102,130 total ED visits (5.1%, 95% CI 4.9%-5.4%) were designated to be for treatment of a psychiatric disorder. When controlling for patient age, sex, initial pulse, presence of chronic medical conditions, geographic region, EMS arrival and nightshift arrival, among patients presenting with psychiatric disorders, Black race was associated with a 2.2% point (95% CI 0.8-3.7, P < .01) greater probability of receiving chemical sedation than non-Hispanic (NH) white race and/or ethnicity (3.0%) and this difference remained significant when accounting for admission or transfer to psychiatric facilities. However, when accounting for the percent of hospital population that was Black (P < .01), individual patient race was no longer associated with a significant increase in receipt of chemical sedation. There was no significant association between race and/or ethnicity and admission or transfer to psychiatric facilities. CONCLUSION: Nationally, Black patients presenting to the ED are more likely to receive chemical sedation than NH-white patients for psychiatric complaints, and this appears to be because hospitals serving a high proportion of Black patients use more chemical sedation, suggesting structural racism is a potential root cause.

"A Catch-22": A Firsthand Account of Barriers and Facilitators to Accessing Health Care During Reentry.

Although a history of incarceration is associated with poor long-term health status, the experience of seeking health care access during reentry is complex. Semistructured open-ended interviews were conducted among individuals with a recent history of incarceration (N = 20). The majority of participants were male (90%) and African American (80%). The majority (55%) had one or more chronic medical conditions, 40% reported active substance addiction, and 75% reported having a chronic psychiatric condition. In qualitative analysis, participants described the three biggest facilitators to accessing health care as eligibility for Medicaid, support through reentry organizations, and online resources. Participants said the major barriers to accessing health care were multiple and competing priorities, limitations of Medicaid, and lack of access to health records. Ensuring individuals with a history of incarceration are connected to the public assistance programs for which they are eligible is an important public health initiative and may facilitate successful reintegration.

Behavioral health service use post-jail release and reduced risk of return to jail.

This study examined whether behavioral health service use post-jail release was associated with reduced risk of jail reincarceration. The study sample included 20,615 individuals who had behavioral health diagnoses and were released from the Philadelphia County jail. Using administrative records of the county jail and state-, county-, and Medicaid-funded behavioral health service use from 2010 to 2018, we conducted Cox proportional hazard analyses to estimate the association between behavioral health service use post-jail release and the risk of return to jail within 3 years. Nearly 50% of the sample returned to jail within 3 years. Individuals who used behavioral health services were 26%-38% less likely to return to jail within 3 years than were individuals who did not. The study results suggest that connecting individuals with behavioral health services upon release from jail can reduce the risk of repeated jail incarceration.

Variation in emergency department visit rates for opioid use disorder: Implications for quality improvement initiatives.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Emergency departments (ED) are critical touchpoints for encounters among patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), but implementation of ED initiated treatment and harm reduction programs has lagged. We describe national patient, visit and hospital-level characteristics of ED OUD visits and characterize EDs with high rates of OUD visits in order to inform policies to optimize ED OUD care. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive, cross-sectional study with the 2017 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, using diagnostic and mechanism of injury codes from ICD-10 to identify OUD related visits. NEDS weights were applied to generate national estimates. We evaluated ED visit and clinical characteristics of all OUD encounters. We categorized hospitals into quartiles by rate of visits for OUD per 1000 ED visits and described the visit, clinical, and hospital characteristics across the four quartiles. RESULTS: In 2017, the weighted national estimate for OUD visits was 1,507,550. Overdoses accounted for 295,954. (19.6%) of visits. OUD visit rates were over 8× times higher among EDs in the highest quartile of OUD visit rate (22.9 per 1000 total ED visits) compared with EDs in the lowest quartile of OUD visit rate (2.7 per 1000 ED visits). Over three fifths (64.2%) of all OUD visits nationwide were seen by the hospitals in the highest quartile of OUD visit rate. These hospitals were predominantly in metropolitan areas (86.2%), over half were teaching hospitals (51.7%), and less than a quarter (23.3%) were Level 1 or Level 2 trauma centers. CONCLUSION: Targeting initial efforts of OUD care programs to high OUD visit rate EDs could improve care for a large portion of OUD patients utilizing emergency care.

Medicaid Expansion Increased Medications For Opioid Use Disorder Among Adults Referred By Criminal Justice Agencies.

Individuals involved with the US criminal justice system have high rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) but face significant barriers to evidence-based treatment. Using 2008-17 data from the Treatment Episode Data Set-Admissions, we examined trends in receipt of medications for OUD among individuals referred by criminal justice agencies and other sources both before and after Medicaid expansion. Individuals referred by criminal justice agencies were less likely to receive medications for OUD than were those referred by other sources during our study period, although this disparity narrowed slightly after Medicaid expansion. Receipt of medications for OUD increased more for individuals referred by criminal justice agencies in states that expanded Medicaid compared with those in states that did not. Medicaid expansion may improve evidence-based treatment for individuals with criminal justice involvement and OUD, although additional policy change outside the health care sector is likely needed to reduce persistent treatment disparities.

Considering the harms of our habits: The reflexive urine drug screen in opioid use disorder treatment.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to abrupt changes in the delivery of substance use treatment, notably the adoption of telehealth services and a departure from mandatory urine drug screens (UDS). Amid current circumstances, the UDS, which had evolved to signal a "successful" recovery, no longer seems feasible, safe, or necessary. Even prior to the pandemic, the UDS had notable drawbacks, including sending a message of mistrust and hierarchy, potentially causing psychological trauma, and incentivizing falsification. Nonetheless, certain patients may state that they depend on the UDS for motivation or structure while some providers may rely on it to discover which patients are struggling. While a combination of self-report and UDS is generally regarded as the strongest measure of substance use among patients, our experiences caring for patients without the results of the UDS during the COVID-19 pandemic have forced us to examine the use of other measures to define a successful recovery. Complete abstinence may not be the goal for all patients and those who achieve abstinence may have additional goals worth supporting. While the UDS will likely be incorporated back into our treatment plans, we suggest unseating it as the centerpiece of substance use care and discovering additional methods of measuring our patients' outcomes in less traumatizing and more patient-centered ways.

Opioid Use Disorder and COVID-19: Crashing of the Crises.

: The COVID19 crisis has created many additional challenges for patients with opioid use disorder, including those seeking treatment with medications for OUD. Some of these challenges include closure of substance use treatment clinics, focus of emergency departments on COVID-19 patients, social distancing and shelter in place orders affecting mental health, bystander overdose rescue, threats to income and supply of substances for people who use drugs. While the initial changes in regulation allowing buprenorphine prescribing by telehealth are welcomed by providers and patients, many additional innovations are required to ensure that additional vulnerabilities and hurdles created by this pandemic scenario do not further fan the flames of the opioid epidemic.

Providing Incentive for Emergency Physician X-Waiver Training: An Evaluation of Program Success and Postintervention Buprenorphine Prescribing.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Emergency department (ED) initiation of buprenorphine for patients with opioid use disorder increases treatment engagement but remains an uncommon practice. One important barrier to ED-initiated buprenorphine is the additional training requirement (X waiver). Our objective is to evaluate the influence of a financial incentive program on emergency physician completion of X-waiver training. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the program's effect on buprenorphine prescribing and to explore physician attitudes toward the incentive. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational cohort study set in 3 urban academic EDs before and after implementation of a financial incentive program providing $750 for completion of X-waiver training. We describe program participation as well as rates of buprenorphine prescribing per opioid use disorder-related encounter before and after the intervention period, using electronic health record data. We also completed a postintervention physician survey assessing attitudes about the incentive program. RESULTS: Overall, 89% of eligible emergency physicians (56/63) completed the X-waiver training during the 6-week incentive period. In the 5 months after the incentive, buprenorphine prescribing per opioid use disorder-related encounter increased from 0.5% to 16% (Δ 15%; 95% confidence interval 10.6% to 19.9%), with substantial variability across sites (range 8% to 22% of opioid use disorder-related encounters). In a postintervention survey, 67% of participating physicians indicated that they would have completed the training for a lower amount. CONCLUSION: A financial incentive paying approximately half the clinical rate was effective in promoting emergency physician X-waiver training. The effect on ED-based buprenorphine prescribing was positive but variable across sites, and likely dependent on the availability of additional supports.