Community-Based Cluster-Randomized Trial to Reduce Opioid Overdose Deaths.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practices for reducing opioid-related overdose deaths include overdose education and naloxone distribution, the use of medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder, and prescription opioid safety. Data are needed on the effectiveness of a community-engaged intervention to reduce opioid-related overdose deaths through enhanced uptake of these practices. METHODS: In this community-level, cluster-randomized trial, we randomly assigned 67 communities in Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio to receive the intervention (34 communities) or a wait-list control (33 communities), stratified according to state. The trial was conducted within the context of both the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic and a national surge in the number of fentanyl-related overdose deaths. The trial groups were balanced within states according to urban or rural classification, previous overdose rate, and community population. The primary outcome was the number of opioid-related overdose deaths among community adults. RESULTS: During the comparison period from July 2021 through June 2022, the population-averaged rates of opioid-related overdose deaths were similar in the intervention group and the control group (47.2 deaths per 100,000 population vs. 51.7 per 100,000 population), for an adjusted rate ratio of 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.76 to 1.09; P = 0.30). The effect of the intervention on the rate of opioid-related overdose deaths did not differ appreciably according to state, urban or rural category, age, sex, or race or ethnic group. Intervention communities implemented 615 evidence-based practice strategies from the 806 strategies selected by communities (254 involving overdose education and naloxone distribution, 256 involving the use of medications for opioid use disorder, and 105 involving prescription opioid safety). Of these evidence-based practice strategies, only 235 (38%) had been initiated by the start of the comparison year. CONCLUSIONS: In this 12-month multimodal intervention trial involving community coalitions in the deployment of evidence-based practices to reduce opioid overdose deaths, death rates were similar in the intervention group and the control group in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic and the fentanyl-related overdose epidemic. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; HCS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04111939.).

Intersectional inequities and longitudinal prevalence estimates of opioid use disorder in Massachusetts 2014-2020: a multi-sample capture-recapture analysis.

Background: As overdoses continue to increase worldwide, accurate estimates are needed to understand the size of the population at risk and address health disparities. Capture-recapture methods may be used in place of direct estimation at nearly any geographic level (e.g., city, state, country) to estimate the size of the population with opioid use disorder (OUD). We performed a multi-sample capture-recapture analysis with persons aged 18-64 years to estimate the prevalence of OUD in Massachusetts from 2014 to 2020, stratified by sex and race/ethnicity. Methods: We used seven statewide administrative data sources linked at the individual level. We developed log-linear models to estimate the unknown OUD-affected population. Uncertainty was characterized using 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) on the total counts and prevalence estimates. Findings: The estimated OUD prevalence increased from 5.47% (95% CI = 4.89%, 5.98%) in 2014 to 5.79% (95% CI = 5.34%, 6.19%) in 2020. Prevalence among Hispanic females doubled (2.46% in 2014 to 4.23% in 2020) and prevalence rose to nearly 10% among Black non-Hispanic males and Hispanic males from 2014 through 2019. Estimates for Black non-Hispanic females more than doubled from 2014 through 2019 (3.39% to 7.09%), and then decreased to 5.69% in 2020. Interpretation: This study is the first to provide OUD prevalence trend estimates by binary sex and race/ethnicity at a state level using capture-recapture methods. Using these methods as the international overdose crisis worsens can allow jurisdictions to appropriately allocate resources and targeted interventions to marginalised populations. Funding: NIDA.

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.

Telemedicine Buprenorphine Initiation and Retention in Opioid Use Disorder Treatment for Medicaid Enrollees.

Importance: Early COVID-19 mitigation strategies placed an additional burden on individuals seeking care for opioid use disorder (OUD). Telemedicine provided a way to initiate and maintain transmucosal buprenorphine treatment of OUD. Objective: To examine associations between transmucosal buprenorphine OUD treatment modality (telemedicine vs traditional) during the COVID-19 public health emergency and the health outcomes of treatment retention and opioid-related nonfatal overdose. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted using Medicaid claims and enrollment data from November 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020, for individuals aged 18 to 64 years from Kentucky and Ohio. Data were collected and analyzed in June 2022, with data updated during revision in August 2023. Exposures: The primary exposure of interest was the modality of the transmucosal buprenorphine OUD treatment initiation. Relevant patient demographic and comorbidity characteristics were included in regression models. Main Outcomes and Measures: There were 2 main outcomes of interest: retention in treatment after initiation and opioid-related nonfatal overdose after initiation. For outcomes measured after initiation, a 90-day follow-up period was used. The main analysis used a new-user study design; transmucosal buprenorphine OUD treatment initiation was defined as initiation after more than a 60-day gap in buprenorphine treatment. In addition, uptake of telemedicine for buprenorphine was examined, overall and within patients initiating treatment, across quarters in 2020. Results: This study included 41 266 individuals in Kentucky (21 269 women [51.5%]; mean [SD] age, 37.9 [9.0] years) and 50 648 individuals in Ohio (26 425 women [52.2%]; mean [SD] age, 37.1 [9.3] years) who received buprenorphine in 2020, with 18 250 and 24 741 people initiating buprenorphine in Kentucky and Ohio, respectively. Telemedicine buprenorphine initiations increased sharply at the beginning of 2020. Compared with nontelemedicine initiation, telemedicine initiation was associated with better odds of 90-day retention with buprenorphine in both states (Kentucky: adjusted odds ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.01-1.27]; Ohio: adjusted odds ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.06-1.32]) in a regression analysis adjusting for patient demographic and comorbidity characteristics. Telemedicine initiation was not associated with opioid-related nonfatal overdose (Kentucky: adjusted odds ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.56-1.40]; Ohio: adjusted odds ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.83-1.41]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicaid enrollees receiving buprenorphine for OUD, telemedicine buprenorphine initiation was associated with retention in treatment early during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings add to the literature demonstrating positive outcomes associated with the use of telemedicine for treatment of OUD.

Massachusetts Prevalence of Opioid Use Disorder Estimation Revisited: Comparing a Bayesian Approach to Standard Capture-Recapture Methods.

BACKGROUND: The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) estimated the prevalence of opioid use disorder (OUD) among the civilian, noninstitutionalized people aged 12 years or older in Massachusetts as 1.2% between 2015 and 2017. Accurate estimation of the prevalence of OUD is critical to the success of treatment and resource planning. Various indirect estimation approaches have been used but are subject to data availability and infrastructure-related issues. METHODS: We used 2015 data from the Massachusetts Public Health Data Warehouse (PHD) to compare the results of two approaches to estimating OUD prevalence in the Massachusetts population. First, we used a seven-dataset capture-recapture analysis under log-linear model parameterization, controlling for the source dependence and effects of age, sex, and county through stratification. Second, we applied a benchmark-multiplier method in a Bayesian framework by linking health care claims data to death certificate data assuming an extrapolation of death rates from observed untreated OUD to unobserved OUD. RESULTS: Our estimates for OUD prevalence among Massachusetts residents (aged 18-64 years) were 4.62% (95% CI = 4.59%, 4.64%) in the capture-recapture approach and 4.29% (95% CrI = 3.49%, 5.32%) in the Bayesian model. Both estimates were approximately four times higher than NSDUH estimates. CONCLUSION: The synthesis of our findings suggests that the disease surveillance system misses a large portion of the population with OUD. Our study also suggests that concurrent use of multiple methods improves the justification and facilitates the triangulation and interpretation of the resulting estimates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04111939.

Investment in Prevention Health Care Delivery Research by the National Institutes of Health.

BACKGROUND: Research assessing the delivery of preventive health care has considerable potential for improving health outcomes and reducing health care costs for the United States population. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the prevention health care delivery research grant portfolio supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A random sample of 14,523 NIH research projects funded during 2012-2019 was selected and coded for various study topics using a structured taxonomy. We analyzed the subset of prevention research projects, for which health care delivery was identified as an independent or dependent variable, including study characteristics and funding trends. RESULTS: Overall, 11.2% of NIH-funded prevention research projects were relevant to health care delivery. Of these projects, 68.6% assessed access to care, 53.4% examined quality, and 27.1% assessed costs. Over the study period, the percentage of funded prevention research projects involving health care delivery increased from 10.9%-15.1%. Over half of the projects assessed research related to the prevention of a new health condition, identification of risk factors, or health promotion (55.5%), whereas < half addressed prevention of disease progression/recurrence (40.4%), screening for early disease (20.2%), or screening for risk factors (1.4%). human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome, cancer, and substance use were the most prevalent health topics studied, whereas other topics-such as lung diseases and Alzheimer disease-were less frequently studied. CONCLUSIONS: Health care delivery research comprises a modest portion of the NIH prevention research portfolio and is mostly focused on access and quality of care; cost-related analyses are less prevalent.human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome, cancer, and substance use are frequently studied health topics in this portfolio.

The policy landscape for naloxone distribution in four states highly impacted by fatal opioid overdoses.

Background: Expanding access to naloxone is one of the most impactful interventions in decreasing opioid-related mortality. However, state distribution rates of naloxone are insufficient to meet community need. The current study sought to better understand this gap by focusing on state policies that may facilitate or impede naloxone distribution in four states highly impacted by fatal opioid overdoses - Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio. Methods: We provide a descriptive analysis of the policy landscape impacting naloxone distribution through pharmacy and community channels in the four states participating in the HEALing Communities Study (HCS). Publicly available data and the expertise of the research team were used to describe each state's naloxone access laws (NALs), Medicaid coverage of naloxone, and community overdose education and naloxone distribution infrastructure. Data presented in this study represent the most current policy landscape through September 2022. Results: Variation exists between specific components of the NALs of each state, the structure of Medicaid coverage of naloxone, and the community distribution infrastructure networks. Massachusetts and New York have a statewide standing order, but other states use different strategies short of a statewide standing order to expand access to naloxone. Quantity limits specific to naloxone may limit access to Medicaid beneficiaries in some states. Conclusion: States participating in the HCS have developed innovative but different mechanisms to ensure naloxone access. Policies were dynamic and moved towards greater access. Research should consider the policy landscape in the implementation and sustainability of interventions as well as the analysis of outcomes.

The prevalence of opioid use disorder in Kentucky's counties: A two-year multi-sample capture-recapture analysis.

BACKGROUND: Kentucky has one of the highest opioid overdose mortality rates in the United States. Accurate estimates of people with opioid use disorder (OUD) are critical to plan for the scope of interventions required to reduce overdose and opioid misuse. Commonly used household surveys are known to underestimate OUD at the state-level and do not provide county-level estimates. METHODS: We performed a multi-sample capture-recapture analysis to estimate OUD prevalence in Kentucky in 2018 and 2019. We utilized four statewide datasets that were linked at the individual level: 1) Registry of Vital Statistics, 2) Emergency Medical Services (EMS), 3) Kentucky's Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), and 4) Kentucky Medicaid. We included persons aged 18-64 years who resided in Kentucky between 2018 and 2019. We identified individuals with administrative data consistent with OUD in each of the datasets, including a fatal opioid-involved overdose (Vital Statistics), EMS runs for suspected opioid overdose, receipt of buprenorphine for OUD treatment (PDMP), or Medicaid claims for OUD. Observed and estimated counts of OUD cases and prevalence of OUD among the adult population in Kentucky. RESULTS: The estimated statewide OUD prevalence was 5.5 % and 5.9 % for 2018 and 2019, respectively, ranging from 1.3 % to 17.7 % across Kentucky counties. As expected, counties with the highest OUD rates were Appalachian counties (eastern area) of the state. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis reveals a substantially larger proportion of KY residents have OUD than previously estimated. Our approach offers a model for states needing county-level estimates of OUD.

Opioid Use Disorder Among Ohio's Medicaid Population: Prevalence Estimates From 19 Counties Using a Multiplier Method.

The decades-long overdose epidemic in the United States is driven by opioid misuse. Overdoses commonly, although not exclusively, occur in individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). To allocate adequate resources and develop appropriately scaled public health responses, accurate estimation of the prevalence of OUD is needed. Indirect methods (e.g., a multiplier method) of estimating prevalence of problematic substance-use behavior circumvent some limitations of household surveys and use of administrative data. We used a multiplier method to estimate OUD prevalence among the adult Medicaid population (ages 18-64 years) in 19 Ohio counties that are highly affected by overdose. We used Medicaid claims data and the US National Vital Statistics System overdose death data, which were linked at the person level. A statistical model leveraged opioid-related death rate information from a group with known OUD to estimate prevalence among a group with unknown OUD status given recorded opioid-related deaths in that group. We estimated that 13.6% of the total study population had OUD in 2019. Men (16.7%) had a higher prevalence of OUD than women (11.4%), and persons aged 35-54 had the highest prevalence (16.7%). Our approach to prevalence estimation has important implications for OUD surveillance and treatment in the United States.

Characteristics of Scientific Evidence Informing Changed U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Insufficient Evidence Statements.

INTRODUCTION: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issues "Insufficient Evidence" (I) statements when scientific evidence is inadequate for making recommendations about clinical preventive services. Insufficient Evidence statements may be changed to definitive recommendations if new research closes evidence gaps. This study examines the characteristics of evidence that informed changes from I statements to definitive recommendations, including NIH's role as a funder. METHODS: A total of 11 USPSTF Insufficient Evidence statements that were changed between 2010 and 2019 were assessed. Study designs, bibliometric influence, and funding sources for scientific articles cited in USPSTF evidence reviews were characterized for each I statement. Data were analyzed in 2019-2020. RESULTS: Most I statements (82%) changed to a B grade; an average of 8.4 years elapsed between issuing the I statement and releasing the definitive recommendation. An average of 63 (range=19-253) articles were included in each USPSTF evidence review. NIH support was cited in 28.8% of articles, on average. The proportion of NIH-funded articles reporting RCT designs was similar to that of non-NIH-funded articles (64.5% vs 59.5%). A higher proportion of NIH-funded articles were rated good quality for study design (39.0%) than the proportion of non-NIH-funded articles (24.4%). Bibliometric influence measured by relative citation ratios was higher for NIH-funded (mean=14.78) than for non-NIH-funded (mean=5.07) articles. CONCLUSIONS: Study designs and funding supports varied widely across topics, but overall, NIH was the largest single funder of evidence informing 11 changed USPSTF I statements. Enhanced efforts by NIH and other stakeholders to address I statement evidence gaps are needed.

The impact of the national stay-at-home order on emergency department visits for suspected opioid overdose during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Although national syndromic surveillance data reported declines in emergency department (ED) visits after the declaration of the national stay-at-home order for COVID-19, little is known whether these declines were observed for suspected opioid overdose. METHODS: This interrupted time series study used syndromic surveillance data from four states participating in the HEALing Communities Study: Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio. All ED encounters for suspected opioid overdose (n = 48,301) occurring during the first 31 weeks of 2020 were included. We examined the impact of the national public health emergency for COVID-19 (declared on March 14, 2020) on trends in ED encounters for suspected opioid overdose. RESULTS: Three of four states (Massachusetts, New York and Ohio) experienced a statistically significant immediate decline in the rate of ED encounters for suspected opioid overdose (per 100,000) after the nationwide public health emergency declaration (MA: -0.99; 95 % CI: -1.75, -0.24; NY: -0.10; 95 % CI, -0.20, 0.0; OH: -0.33, 95 % CI: -0.58, -0.07). After this date, Ohio and Kentucky experienced a sustained rate of increase for a 13-week period. New York experienced a decrease in the rate of ED encounters for a 10-week period, after which the rate began to increase. In Massachusetts after a significant immediate decline in the rate of ED encounters, there was no significant difference in the rate of change for a 6-week period, followed by an immediate increase in the ED rate to higher than pre-COVID levels. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity in the trends in ED encounters between the four sites show that the national stay-at-home order had a differential impact on opioid overdose ED presentation in each state.

Disparities in Opioid Overdose Death Trends by Race/Ethnicity, 2018-2019, From the HEALing Communities Study.

Objectives. To examine trends in opioid overdose deaths by race/ethnicity from 2018 to 2019 across 67 HEALing Communities Study (HCS) communities in Kentucky, New York, Massachusetts, and Ohio. Methods. We used state death certificate records to calculate opioid overdose death rates per 100 000 adult residents of the 67 HCS communities for 2018 and 2019. We used Poisson regression to calculate the ratio of 2019 to 2018 rates. We compared changes by race/ethnicity by calculating a ratio of rate ratios (RRR) for each racial/ethnic group compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Results. Opioid overdose death rates were 38.3 and 39.5 per 100 000 for 2018 and 2019, respectively, without a significant change from 2018 to 2019 (rate ratio = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.98, 1.08). We estimated a 40% increase in opioid overdose death rate for non-Hispanic Black individuals (RRR = 1.40; 95% CI = 1.22, 1.62) relative to non-Hispanic White individuals but no change among other race/ethnicities. Conclusions. Overall opioid overdose death rates have leveled off but have increased among non-Hispanic Black individuals. Public Health Implications. An antiracist public health approach is needed to address the crisis of opioid-related harms. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(10):1851-1854. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306431).

Health Literacy Research Funded by the NIH for Disease Prevention.

BACKGROUND: Advancing health literacy is a fundamental step toward achieving population health. To that end, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded research to increase scientific understanding of how health literacy can reduce disparities and enhance the health of the United States. OBJECTIVE: This study identified and evaluated NIH-funded health literacy research focusing on disease prevention. METHODS: New R01, R03, and R21 research project grants awarded from fiscal year (FY) 2004 to FY 2017 studying health literacy and disease prevention were identified. Study characteristics, including the role of health literacy, how health literacy was measured, populations studied, and study design, were coded for each grant. Administrative grant data were obtained from the NIH's internal database. Research impact was assessed using the relative citation ratio (RCR). KEY RESULTS: There were 192 grants studying health literacy and disease prevention awarded by 18 NIH institutes and centers from FY 2004 to FY 2017, covering a wide variety of health conditions including cancer (26.0%), infectious diseases (13.5%), nutrition (8.3%), drug/alcohol use (7.8%), and cardiovascular disease (6.3%). Most grants studied the health literacy skills of patients (88%), with a few studies assessing the health literacy practices of health care providers (2.1%) or systems (1%). There was good representation of populations with traditionally low levels of health literacy, including Black/African American participants (30.2%), Hispanic/Latinx participants (28.6%), older adults (37%), and people with low income (20.8%). The scientific articles generated by these grants were more than twice (RCR = 2.18) as influential on the field as similar articles. CONCLUSIONS: The NIH provided support for a wide array of prevention-focused health literacy research. The value of this research is highlighted by the number of funding institutes and centers, the diversity of populations and health conditions studied, and the effect these grants had on the field. Future research should move beyond patient-level health literacy to health literacy practices of health care systems and providers. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2020, 4(4):e212-e223.] PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This study describes health literacy research funded by the National Institutes of Health that focused on disease prevention. These grants sought to prevent a variety of health conditions, but health literacy research over the past 14 years continued to concentrate on the capacity of patients despite increased attention on the health literacy practices of health care providers and systems.

Health economic design for cost, cost-effectiveness and simulation analyses in the HEALing Communities Study.

BACKGROUND: The HEALing Communities Study (HCS) is designed to implement and evaluate the Communities That HEAL (CTH) intervention, a conceptually driven framework to assist communities in selecting and adopting evidence-based practices to reduce opioid overdose deaths. The goal of the HCS is to produce generalizable information for policy makers and community stakeholders seeking to implement CTH or a similar community intervention. To support this objective, one aim of the HCS is a health economics study (HES), the results of which will inform decisions around fiscal feasibility and sustainability relevant to other community settings. METHODS: The HES is integrated into the HCS design: an unblinded, multisite, parallel arm, cluster randomized, wait list-controlled trial of the CTH intervention implemented in 67 communities in four U.S. states: Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio. The objectives of the HES are to estimate the economic costs to communities of implementing and sustaining CTH; estimate broader societal costs associated with CTH; estimate the cost-effectiveness of CTH for overdose deaths avoided; and use simulation modeling to evaluate the short- and long-term health and economic impact of CTH, including future overdose deaths avoided and quality-adjusted life years saved, and to develop a simulation policy tool for communities that seek to implement CTH or a similar community intervention. DISCUSSION: The HCS offers an unprecedented opportunity to conduct health economics research on solutions to the opioid crisis and to increase understanding of the impact and value of complex, community-level interventions.

Addressing opioid overdose deaths: The vision for the HEALing communities study.

The United States is facing two devastating public health crises- the opioid epidemic and the COVID-19 pandemic. Within this context, one of the most ambitious implementation studies in addiction research is moving forward. Launched in May 2019, the HEALing Communities Study (HCS) was developed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) as part of the Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM Initiative (National Institutes of Health, 2020). The goal for this research was to reduce opioid overdose deaths by 40 % in three years by enhancing and integrating the delivery of multiple evidence-based practices (EBPs) with proven effectiveness in reducing opioid overdose deaths across health care, justice, and community settings. This paper describes the initial vision, goals, and objectives of this initiative; the impact of COVID-19; and the potential for knowledge to be generated from HCS at the intersection of an unrelenting epidemic of opioid misuse and overdoses and the ravishing COVID-19 pandemic.

Community dashboards to support data-informed decision-making in the HEALing communities study.

BACKGROUND: With opioid misuse, opioid use disorder (OUD), and opioid overdose deaths persisting at epidemic levels in the U.S., the largest implementation study in addiction research-the HEALing Communities Study (HCS)-is evaluating the impact of the Communities That Heal (CTH) intervention on reducing opioid overdose deaths in 67 disproportionately affected communities from four states (i.e., "sites"). Community-tailored dashboards are central to the CTH intervention's mandate to implement a community-engaged and data-driven process. These dashboards support a participating community's decision-making for selection and monitoring of evidence-based practices to reduce opioid overdose deaths. METHODS/DESIGN: A community-tailored dashboard is a web-based set of interactive data visualizations of community-specific metrics. Metrics include opioid overdose deaths and other OUD-related measures, as well as drivers of change of these outcomes in a community. Each community-tailored dashboard is a product of a co-creation process between HCS researchers and stakeholders from each community. The four research sites used a varied set of technical approaches and solutions to support the scientific design and CTH intervention implementation. Ongoing evaluation of the dashboards involves quantitative and qualitative data on key aspects posited to shape dashboard use combined with website analytics. DISCUSSION: The HCS presents an opportunity to advance how community-tailored dashboards can foster community-driven solutions to address the opioid epidemic. Lessons learned can be applied to inform interventions for public health concerns and issues that have disproportionate impact across communities and populations (e.g., racial/ethnic and sexual/gender minorities and other marginalized individuals). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04111939).

Operationalizing and selecting outcome measures for the HEALing Communities Study.

BACKGROUND: The Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM (HEALing) Communities Study (HCS) is a multisite, parallel-group, cluster randomized wait-list controlled trial evaluating the impact of the Communities That HEAL intervention to reduce opioid overdose deaths and associated adverse outcomes. This paper presents the approach used to define and align administrative data across the four research sites to measure key study outcomes. METHODS: Priority was given to using administrative data and established data collection infrastructure to ensure reliable, timely, and sustainable measures and to harmonize study outcomes across the HCS sites. RESULTS: The research teams established multiple data use agreements and developed technical specifications for more than 80 study measures. The primary outcome, number of opioid overdose deaths, will be measured from death certificate data. Three secondary outcome measures will support hypothesis testing for specific evidence-based practices known to decrease opioid overdose deaths: (1) number of naloxone units distributed in HCS communities; (2) number of unique HCS residents receiving Food and Drug Administration-approved buprenorphine products for treatment of opioid use disorder; and (3) number of HCS residents with new incidents of high-risk opioid prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: The HCS has already made an impact on existing data capacity in the four states. In addition to providing data needed to measure study outcomes, the HCS will provide methodology and tools to facilitate data-driven responses to the opioid epidemic, and establish a central repository for community-level longitudinal data to help researchers and public health practitioners study and understand different aspects of the Communities That HEAL framework.

Sources of Support for Studies That Inform Recommendations of the Community Preventive Services Task Force.

OBJECTIVES: The Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) makes evidence-based recommendations about preventive services, programs, and policies in community settings to improve public health. CPSTF recommendations are based on systematic evidence reviews. This study examined the sponsors (ie, sources of financial, material, or intellectual support) for publications included in systematic reviews used by the CPSTF to make recommendations during a 9-year period. METHODS: We examined systematic evidence reviews (effectiveness reviews and economic reviews) for CPSTF findings issued from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2018. We assessed study publications used in these reviews for sources of support; we classified sources as government, nonprofit, industry, or no identified support. We also identified country of origin for each sponsor and the most frequently mentioned sponsors. RESULTS: The CPSTF issued findings based on 144 systematic reviews (106 effectiveness reviews and 38 economic reviews). These reviews included 3846 publications: 3363 publications in effectiveness reviews and 483 publications in economic reviews. Government agencies supported 57.1% (n = 1919) of publications in effectiveness reviews and 59.2% (n = 286) in economic reviews. More than 1500 study sponsors from 36 countries provided support. The National Institutes of Health was the leading sponsor for effectiveness reviews (21.3%; 718 of 3363) and economic reviews (16.2%; 78 of 480), followed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (7.0%; 234 of 3363 effectiveness reviews and 14.8%; 71 of 480 economic reviews). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base used by the CPSTF was supported by an array of sponsors, with government agencies providing the most support. Study findings highlight the need for sponsorship transparency and the role of government as a leading supporter of studies that underpin CPSTF recommendations for improving public health.