Literature Collection
10K+
References
9K+
Articles
1400+
Grey Literature
4500+
Opioids & SU
The Literature Collection contains over 10,000 references for published and grey literature on the integration of behavioral health and primary care. Learn More
Use the Search feature below to find references for your terms across the entire Literature Collection, or limit your searches by Authors, Keywords, or Titles and by Year, Type, or Topic. View your search results as displayed, or use the options to: Show more references per page; Sort references by Title or Date; and Refine your search criteria. Expand an individual reference to View Details. Full-text access to the literature may be available through a link to PubMed, a DOI, or a URL. References may also be exported for use in bibliographic software (e.g., EndNote, RefWorks, Zotero).
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
Buprenorphine is a highly effective treatment for opioid use disorder and a critical tool for addressing the worsening U.S. overdose crisis. However, multiple barriers to treatment - including stringent federal regulations - have historically made this medication hard to reach for many who need it. In 2020, under the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, federal regulators substantially changed access to buprenorphine by allowing prescribers to initiate patients on buprenorphine via telehealth without first evaluating them in person. As the Public Health Emergency is set to expire in May of 2023, Congress and federal agencies can leverage extensive evidence from studies conducted during the wake of the pandemic to make evidencebased decisions on the regulation of buprenorphine going forward. To aid policy makers, this review synthesizes and interprets peer-reviewed research on the effect of buprenorphine flexibilities on uptake and implementation of telehealth, and its impact on OUD patient and prescriber experiences, access to treatment and health outcomes. Overall, our review finds that many prescribers and patients took advantage of telehealth, including the audio-only option, with a wide range of benefits and few downsides. As a result, federal regulators-including agencies and Congress-should continue non-restricted use of telehealth for buprenorphine initiation.
Buprenorphine is a highly effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) and a critical tool for addressing the worsening US overdose crisis. However, multiple barriers to treatment-including stringent federal regulations-have historically made this medication hard to reach for many who need it. In 2020, under the COVID-19 public health emergency, federal regulators substantially changed access to buprenorphine by allowing prescribers to initiate patients on buprenorphine via telehealth without first evaluating them in person. As the public health emergency has been set to expire in May of 2023, Congress and federal agencies can leverage extensive evidence from studies conducted during the wake of the pandemic to make evidence-based decisions on the regulation of buprenorphine going forward. To aid policy makers, this narrative review synthesizes and interprets peer-reviewed research on the effect of buprenorphine flexibilities on the uptake and implementation of telehealth, and its impact on OUD patient and prescriber experiences, access to treatment, and health outcomes. Overall, our review finds that many prescribers and patients took advantage of telehealth, including the audio-only option, with a wide range of benefits and few downsides. As a result, federal regulators-including agencies and Congress-should continue nonrestricted use of telehealth for buprenorphine initiation.
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
IMPORTANCE: Harm reduction is associated with improved health outcomes among people who use substances. As overdose deaths persist, hospitals are recognizing the need for harm reduction services; however, little is known about the outcomes of hospital-based harm reduction for patients and staff. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient and staff perspectives on the impact and challenges of a hospital-based harm reduction program offering safer use education and supplies at discharge. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This qualitative study consisted of 40-minute semistructured interviews with hospitalized patients receiving harm reduction services and hospital staff at an urban, safety-net hospital in California from October 2022 to March 2023. Purposive sampling allowed inclusion of diverse patient racial and ethnic identities, substance use disorders (SUDs), and staff roles. EXPOSURE: Receipt of harm reduction education and/or supplies (eg, syringes, pipes, naloxone, and test strips) from an addiction consult team, or providing care for patients receiving these services. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key themes. RESULTS: A total of 40 participants completed interviews, including 20 patients (mean [SD] age, 43 [13] years; 1 American Indian or Alaska Native [5%], 1 Asian and Pacific Islander [5%], 6 Black [30%]; 6 Latine [30%]; and 6 White [30%]) and 20 staff (mean [SD] age 37 [8] years). Patients were diagnosed with a variety of SUDs (7 patients with opioid and stimulant use disorder [35%]; 7 patients with stimulant use disorder [35%]; 3 patients with opioid use disorder [15%]; and 3 patients with alcohol use disorder [15%]). A total of 3 themes were identified; respondents reported that harm reduction programs (1) expanded access to harm reduction education and supplies, particularly for ethnically and racially minoritized populations; (2) built trust by improving the patient care experience and increasing engagement; and (3) catalyzed culture change by helping destigmatize care for individuals who planned to continue using substances and increasing staff fulfillment. Black and Latine patients, those who primarily used stimulants, and those with limited English proficiency (LEP) reported learning new harm reduction strategies. Program challenges included hesitancy regarding regulations, limited SUD education among staff, remaining stigma, and the need for careful assessment of patient goals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this qualitative study, patients and staff believed that integrating harm reduction services into hospital care increased access for populations unfamiliar with harm reduction, improved trust, and reduced stigma. These findings suggest that efforts to increase access to harm reduction services for Black, Latine, and LEP populations, including those who use stimulants, are especially needed.
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
During the pandemic, the US has seen increases in substance use and the number of deaths by overdose. This study aimed to identify specific impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on those with SUD. Specifically, we catalogued the perceptions and impact of the pandemic on mental health, sobriety, access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and utility of telehealth in the treatment of SUD. Findings showed important perceptions patients had lower agreement on the difficulty of staying sober compared to COVID-19's effects on mental health and high agreement on openness to telehealth as treatment. Researchers and clinicians must continue efforts to understand and ameliorate the disproportionate burden in morbidity and mortality in individuals with SUD.
During the pandemic, the US has seen increases in substance use and the number of deaths by overdose. This study aimed to identify specific impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on those with SUD. Specifically, we catalogued the perceptions and impact of the pandemic on mental health, sobriety, access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and utility of telehealth in the treatment of SUD. Findings showed important perceptions patients had lower agreement on the difficulty of staying sober compared to COVID-19's effects on mental health and high agreement on openness to telehealth as treatment. Researchers and clinicians must continue efforts to understand and ameliorate the disproportionate burden in morbidity and mortality in individuals with SUD.
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
Opioid abuse and dependence continues to rise in both the general population and pregnancy, with opioid overdose deaths having quadrupled in the last 15 years. Illicit drug use in last 30 days of pregnancy was over 4% with almost 0.6% documented maternal opiate use at time of birth. The management of the opioid-tolerant, buprenorphine-dependent or methadone-dependent patient in the peripartum period is reviewed. Options for treatment of opioid dependence, acute pain management, and perioperative multimodal analgesia are discussed. The effects of maternal management on neonatal abstinence syndrome are also reviewed.
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)
BACKGROUND: Supervised consumption sites (SCS) are an evidence-based intervention proven effective for preventing drug overdose deaths. Obstacles to accessing SCS include stigma, limited hours of operation, concerns about policing, and limited geographic availability. Mobile overdose response services (MORS) are novel technologies that provide virtual supervised consumption to help reduce the risk of fatal overdoses, especially for those who use alone. MORS can take various forms, such as phone-based hotlines and mobile apps. The aim of this article is to assess the perceptions of MORS among healthcare and harm reduction staff to determine if they would be comfortable educating clients about these services. METHODS: Twenty-two healthcare and harm reduction staff were recruited from Canada using convenience, snowball, and purposive sampling techniques to complete semistructured interviews. Inductive thematic analysis informed by grounded theory was used to identify main themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: (1) increasing MORS awareness among healthcare providers was seen as useful; (2) MORS might lessen the burden of drug overdoses on the healthcare system but could also increase ambulance callouts; (3) MORS would benefit from certain improvements such as providing harm reduction resources and other supports; and (4) MORS are viewed as supplements for harm reduction, but SCS were preferred. CONCLUSIONS: This research provides valuable perspectives from healthcare and harm reduction workers to understand their perception of MORS and identifies key areas of potential improvement. Practical initiatives to improve MORS implementation outcomes exist.
![Pubmed](/themes/custom/academy2020/images/pubmed_img.png)