Literature Collection

BACKGROUND: Substance use is prevalent in Canada, yet treatment is inaccessible. The Rapid Access to Addiction Medicine (RAAM) clinic opened at the University Health Network (UHN) in January 2018 as part of a larger network of addictions clinics in Toronto, Ontario, to enable timely, low barrier access to medical treatment for substance use disorder (SUD). Patients attend on a walk-in basis without requiring an appointment or referral. We describe the RAAM clinic model, including referral patterns, patient demographics and substance use patterns. Secondary outcomes include retention in treatment and changes in both self-reported and objective substance use. METHODS: The Electronic Medical Record at the clinic was reviewed for the first 26 weeks of the clinic's operation. We identified SUD diagnoses, referral source, medications prescribed, retention in care and self-reported substance use. RESULTS: The clinic saw 64 unique patients: 66% had alcohol use disorder (AUD), 39% had opiate use disorder (OUD) and 20% had stimulant use disorder. Fifty-five percent of patients were referred from primary care providers, 30% from the emergency department and 11% from withdrawal management services. Forty-two percent remained on-going patients, 23% were discharged to other care and 34% were lost to follow-up. Gabapentin (39%), naltrexone (39%), and acamprosate (15%) were most frequently prescribed for AUD. Patients with AUD reported a significant decrease in alcohol consumption at their most recent visit. Most patients (65%) with OUD were prescribed buprenorphine, and most patients with OUD (65%) had a negative urine screen at their most recent visit. CONCLUSION: The RAAM model provides low-barrier, accessible outpatient care for patients with substance use disorder and facilitates the prescription of evidence-based pharmacotherapy for AUD and OUD. Patients referred by their primary care physician and the emergency department demonstrated a reduction in median alcohol consumption and high rates of opioid abstinence.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are rarely started on buprenorphine or methadone maintenance despite evidence that these medications reduce all-cause mortality, overdoses, and hospital readmissions. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether clinician education and a team of residents and hospitalist attendings waivered to prescribe buprenorphine increased the rate of starting patients with OUD on buprenorphine maintenance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Quality improvement study conducted at a large, urban, academic hospital in Maryland involving hospitalized patients with OUD on internal medicine resident services. INTERVENTION: We developed a protocol for initiating buprenorphine maintenance, presented an educational conference, and started the resident-led Buprenorphine Bridge Team of residents and attendings waivered to prescribe buprenorphine to bridge patients from discharge to follow-up. MEASUREMENTS: The percent of eligible inpatients with OUD initiated on buprenorphine maintenance, 24 weeks before and after the intervention; engagement in treatment after discharge; and resident knowledge and comfort with buprenorphine. RESULTS: The rate of starting buprenorphine maintenance increased from 10% (30 of 305 eligible patients) to 24% (64 of 270 eligible patients) after the intervention, with interrupted time series analysis showing a significant increase in rate (14.4%; 95% CI, 3.6%-25.3%; P = .02). Engagement in treatment after discharge was unchanged (40%-46% engaged 30 days after discharge). Of 156 internal medicine residents, 89 (57%) completed the baseline survey and 66 (42%) completed the follow-up survey. Responses demonstrated improved resident knowledge and comfort with buprenorphine. CONCLUSION: Internal medicine resident teams were more likely to start patients on buprenorphine maintenance after clinician education and implementation of a Buprenorphine Bridge Team.

OBJECTIVE: In 2019, Pennsylvania established a voluntary financial incentive program designed to increase the engagement in addiction treatment for Medicaid patients with opioid use disorder after emergency department (ED) encounters. In this qualitative study involving hospital leaders, the authors examined decisions leading to participation in this program as well as barriers and facilitators that influenced its implementation. METHODS: Twenty semistructured interviews were conducted with leaders from a diverse sample of hospitals and health systems across Pennsylvania. Interviews were planned and analyzed following the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. An iterative approach was used to analyze the interviews and determine key themes and patterns regarding implementation of this policy initiative in hospitals. RESULTS: The authors identified six key themes that reflected barriers and facilitators to hospital participation in the program. Participation in the program was facilitated by community partners capable of arranging outpatient treatment for opioid use disorder, incentive payments focusing hospital leadership on opioid treatment pathways, multidisciplinary planning, and flexibility in adapting pathways for local needs. Barriers to program participation concerned the implementation of buprenorphine prescribing and the measurement of treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: A financial incentive policy encouraged hospitals to enact rapid system and practice changes to support treatment for opioid use disorder, although challenges remained in implementing evidence-based treatment-specifically, initiation of buprenorphine-for patients visiting the ED. Analysis of treatment outcomes is needed to further evaluate this policy initiative, but new delivery and payment models may improve systems to treat patients who have an opioid use disorder.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Video directly observed therapy (video-DOT) through a mobile health platform may improve buprenorphine adherence and decrease diversion. This pilot study tested the acceptability and feasibility of using this technology among patients receiving buprenorphine in an office-based setting. METHODS: Participants were instructed to record videos of themselves taking buprenorphine. Data were collected from weekly in-person visits over a 4-week period; assessments included self-report of medication adherence, substance use, satisfaction with treatment and use of the application, and also urine drug testing. Open-ended questions at the final visit solicited feedback on patients' experiences using the mobile health application. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 14 patients; a majority were male (86%) and White (79%). All participants except 1 (93%) were able to use the application successfully to upload videos. Among those who successfully used the application, the percentage of daily videos uploaded per participant ranged from 18% to 96%; on average, daily videos were submitted by participants 72% of the time. Most participants (10/14; 71%) reported being "very satisfied" with the application; of the remaining 4 participants, 2 were "satisfied" and 2 were "neutral." Participants reported liking the accountability and structure of the application provided and its ease of use. Negative feedback included minor discomfort at viewing one's self during recording and the time required. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, use of a mobile health application for video-DOT of buprenorphine appears feasible and acceptable for patients who are treated in an office-based setting. Further research is needed to test whether use of such an application can improve treatment delivery and health outcomes.

IMPORTANCE: Office-based opiate agonist therapy has dramatically expanded access to medication-assisted treatment over the past decade but has also led to increased buprenorphine diversion. OBJECTIVE: Our study sought to characterize physicians who participate in office-based therapy (OBT) to assess patient access to OBT in Ohio 10 years after its introduction. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional telephone survey of Drug Addiction Treatment Act-waivered physicians in Ohio listed by the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT). MAIN OUTCOMES: This study sought to determine what proportion of eligible physicians are actively prescribing buprenorphine, whether they accept insurance for OBT, and whether they accept insurance for non-OBT services. In addition, we evaluated what physician characteristics predicted those primary outcomes. We hypothesized that a significant minority of eligible physicians are not active prescribers of buprenorphine. In addition, we expected that a significant minority of OBT prescribers do not accept insurance, further restricting patient access. We further hypothesized that a large subset of OBT prescribers accept insurance in their regular practices but do not take insurance for OBT. RESULTS: Of the 466 listed physicians, 327 (70.2%) practice representatives were reached for interview. Thirty-three physicians were excluded, with a true response rate of 75.5%. In total, 80.7% of providers reached were active OBT prescribers. Of these, 52.7% accepted insurance for OBT, 20.8% accepted insurance for non-OBT services but not for OBT, and 26.5% did not accept insurance for any services. Practices who did not accept insurance were more likely among dedicated addiction clinics located outside of Ohio's 6 major cities. Practices who normally accepted insurance but did not for OBT services were more likely in urban locations and were not associated with dedicated addiction practices. Neither business practice was associated with physician specialty. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Access to OBT in Ohio is far lower than what the 466 listed physicians suggests. Nearly 1 in 5 of those physicians are not active OBT prescribers, and 1 in 2 active prescribers do not accept insurance for OBT. Further research is needed to determine whether practices who do not accept insurance provide care consistent with CSAT guidelines and whether such practice patterns contribute to buprenorphine diversion.

BACKGROUND: Improving access to treatment for opioid use disorder is a national priority, but little is known about the barriers encountered by patients seeking buprenorphine-naloxone ("buprenorphine") treatment. OBJECTIVE: To assess real-world access to buprenorphine treatment for uninsured or Medicaid-covered patients reporting current heroin use. DESIGN: Audit survey ("secret shopper" study). SETTING: 6 U.S. jurisdictions with a high burden of opioid-related mortality (Massachusetts, Maryland, New Hampshire, West Virginia, Ohio, and the District of Columbia). PARTICIPANTS: From July to November 2018, callers contacted 546 publicly listed buprenorphine prescribers twice, posing as uninsured or Medicaid-covered patients seeking buprenorphine treatment. MEASUREMENTS: Rates of new appointments offered, whether buprenorphine prescription was possible at the first visit, and wait times. RESULTS: Among 1092 contacts with 546 clinicians, schedulers were reached for 849 calls (78% response rate). Clinicians offered new appointments to 54% of Medicaid contacts and 62% of uninsured-self-pay contacts, whereas 27% of Medicaid and 41% of uninsured-self-pay contacts were offered an appointment with the possibility of buprenorphine prescription at the first visit. The median wait time to the first appointment was 6 days (interquartile range [IQR], 2 to 10 days) for Medicaid contacts and 5 days (IQR, 1 to 9 days) for uninsured-self-pay contacts. These wait times were similar regardless of clinician type or payer status. The median wait time from first contact to possible buprenorphine induction was 8 days (IQR, 4 to 15 days) for Medicaid and 7 days (IQR, 3 to 14 days) for uninsured-self-pay contacts. LIMITATION: The survey sample included only publicly listed buprenorphine prescribers. CONCLUSION: Many buprenorphine prescribers did not offer new appointments or rapid buprenorphine access to callers reporting active heroin use, particularly those with Medicaid coverage. Nevertheless, wait times were not long, implying that opportunities may exist to increase access by using the existing prescriber workforce.

Background: At the start of the pandemic, relaxation of buprenorphine prescribing regulations created an opportunity to create new models of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) delivery and care. To expand and improve access to MOUD, we adapted and implemented the Tele-Harm Reduction (THR) intervention; a multicomponent, telehealth-based and peer-driven intervention to promote HIV viral suppression among people who inject drugs (PWID) accessing a syringe services program (SSP). This study examined buprenorphine initiation and retention among PWID with opioid use disorder who received the adapted THR intervention at the IDEA Miami SSP.Methods: A retrospective chart review of participants who received the THR intervention for MOUD was performed to examine the impact of telehealth on buprenorphine retention. Our primary outcome was three-month retention, defined as three consecutive months of buprenorphine dispensed from the pharmacy.Results: A total of 109 participants received the adapted THR intervention. Three-month retention rate on buprenorphine was 58.7%. Seeing a provider via telehealth at baseline or any follow up visit (aOR = 7.53, 95% CI: [2.36, 23.98]) and participants who had received an escalating dose of buprenorphine after baseline visit (aOR = 8.09, 95% CI: [1.83, 35.87]) had a higher adjusted odds of retention at three months. Participants who self-reported or tested positive for a stimulant (methamphetamine, amphetamine, or cocaine) at baseline had a lower adjusted odds of retention on buprenorphine at three months (aOR = 0.29, 95% CI: [0.09, 0.93]).Conclusions: Harm reduction settings can adapt dynamically to the needs of PWID in provision of critical lifesaving buprenorphine in a truly destigmatising approach. Our pilot suggests that an SSP may be an acceptable and feasible venue for delivery of THR to increase uptake of buprenorphine by PWID and promote retention in care.KEY MESSAGESThe Tele-Harm Reduction intervention can be adapted for initiating and retaining people who inject drugs with opioid use disorder on buprenorphine within a syringe services program setting. Using telehealth was associated with increased three-month buprenorphine retention. Baseline stimulant use was negatively associated with three-month buprenorphine retention.