Literature Collection

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) disproportionately impacts rural and American Indian communities and has quadrupled among pregnant individuals nationwide in the past two decades. Yet, limited data are available about access and quality of care available to pregnant individuals in rural areas, particularly among American Indians (AIs). Unannounced standardized patients (USPs), or "secret shoppers" with standardized characteristics, have been used to assess healthcare access and quality when outcomes cannot be measured by conventional methods or when differences may exist between actual versus reported care. While the USP approach has shown benefit in evaluating primary care and select specialties, its use to date for OUD and pregnancy is very limited. METHODS: We used literature review, current practice guidelines for perinatal OUD management, and stakeholder engagement to design a novel USP protocol to assess healthcare access and quality for OUD in pregnancy. We developed two USP profiles-one white and one AI-to reflect our target study area consisting of three rural, predominantly white and AI US counties. We partnered with a local community health center network providing care to a large AI population to define six priority outcomes for evaluation: (1) OUD treatment knowledge among clinical staff answering telephones; (2) primary care clinic facilitation and provision of prenatal care and buprenorphine treatment; (3) appropriate completion of evidence-based screening, symptom assessment, and initial steps in management; (4) appropriate completion of risk factor screening/probing about individual circumstances that may affect care; (5) patient-directed tone, stigma, and professionalism by clinic staff; and (6) disparities in care between whites and American Indians. DISCUSSION: The development of this USP protocol tailored to a specific environment and high-risk patient population establishes an innovative approach to evaluate healthcare access and quality for pregnant individuals with OUD. It is intended to serve as a roadmap for our own study and for future related work within the context of substance use disorders and pregnancy.

Background: Addressing the opioid crisis requires an understanding of how to train both health professional students and practicing clinicians on medications for opioid use disorder (mOUD). We designed a robust evaluation instrument to assess the impact of training on perceived clinical knowledge in these different categories of learners. Methods: We enrolled 3rd and 4th year medical, physician assistant (PA), and nurse practitioner (NP) students, as well as practicing PAs, NPs, and physicians to undertake the Drug Addiction Treatment Act (DATA) Waiver Training for mOUD. We designed and implemented a cross-sectional survey to assess perceived change in clinical knowledge as a result of training in opioid use disorder and satisfaction with training. Results: Twenty-one MD/DO and 45 NP/PA students, and 24 practicing MD/DO and 27 NP/PAs completed the survey. Among health professional students (n = 66) and practicing clinicians (n =51), perceived clinical knowledge scores increased significantly (p < 0.001) for all 13 variables. Program evaluation scores for the buprenorphine waiver training were high with no statistical differences between students and practicing clinicians. Overall, the majority of participants indicated they would recommend the training to a colleague (Students' score = 4.84; practicing clinician scores = 4.53; scale = strongly disagree = 1 to strongly agree = 5). Conclusions: Our novel instrument allowed us to determine that the implementation of buprenorphine waiver trainings for health professional students and practicing clinicians leads to significant increases in perceived knowledge, interest and confidence in diagnosing and treating OUD. Although the buprenorphine waiver can now be obtained without training, many waivered providers still do not prescribe buprenorphine; integrating training into medical, NP, and PA curriculum for students and offering the training to practicing clinicians may increase confidence and uptake of mOUD.

This paper offers a review and recommendations for clinicians working with patients interested in discontinuing opioid agonist treatment. As buprenorphine/naloxone has gained widespread acceptance for opioid addiction, many treatment providers and patients have a range of hopes and expectations about its optimal use. A surprising number assume buprenorphine/naloxone is primarily useful as a medication to transition off illicit opioid use, and success is partially defined by discontinuing the medication. Despite accumulating evidence that a majority of patients will need to remain on medication to preserve their gains, clinicians often have to address a patient's fervent desire to taper. Using the concept of "recovery capital," our review addresses (1) the appropriate duration of opioid agonist treatment, (2) risks associated with discontinuing, (3) a checklist that guides the patient through self-assessment of the wisdom of discontinuing opioid agonist treatment, and (4) shared decision making about how to proceed.

BACKGROUND: Availability of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has increased during the past two decades but treatment retention and adherence remain low. This study aimed to measure the impact of out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost on treatment retention and adherence among US commercially insured patients. METHODS: Medical payment records from IBM MarketScan were analyzed for 6,439 adults age 18-64 years with commercial insurance who initiated buprenorphine treatment during January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017. Regression models analyzed the relationship between patients' average daily out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost and buprenorphine retention (at least 80 % days covered by buprenorphine) at three different thresholds (180, 360, and 540 days) and adherence (the number of days of buprenorphine coverage) within each retention threshold. Models controlled for patient demographic and clinical characteristics including age, sex, presence of other substance use disorders, psychiatric and pain diagnoses, and receipt of prescription medications. RESULTS: A one dollar increase in daily out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost was associated with a 12-14 % decrease in the odds of retention and a 5-8 % increase in the number of days without buprenorphine coverage during each analyzed retention threshold. CONCLUSION: Recent policies have attempted to address supply-side barriers to MOUD treatment. This study highlights patient cost-sharing as a demand-side barrier to MOUD. While the average out-of-pocket buprenorphine cost is lower than two decades ago, this study suggests even at current levels such costs decrease retention and adherence among commercially insured patients. Efforts to address demand-side barriers could help maximize the health and social benefits of buprenorphine-based MOUD.