Literature Collection

OBJECTIVE: Effective treatments for opioid use disorder exist, but rural areas of the United States have a shortage of services offering such treatments. Physician bias toward patients with opioid use disorder can also limit care access, but no studies have assessed whether physician bias is a more acute barrier in rural compared with urban communities. METHODS: In total, 408 board-certified physicians in Ohio, a state with a high rate of opioid overdoses, completed an online survey examining perspectives on clinical care for patients who misuse opioids. Respondents with missing county-level data were excluded, leaving a total sample of 274. The authors used t tests to determine rural-urban differences in bias, key predictors of bias, and availability of opioid services. Multivariable regression modeling was used to estimate rural-urban differences in bias independent of key bias predictors. RESULTS: Physicians in rural areas (N=37) reported higher levels of bias toward patients with opioid use disorder than did their urban counterparts (N=237). This difference remained statistically significant even after accounting for known bias predictors and physician specialty. Physicians specializing in addiction medicine reported lower bias than did physicians not working in this specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Given existing disparities in harm reduction and addiction treatment services in rural areas, increased physician bias in counties lacking these services suggests that rural patients with opioid use disorder face numerous challenges to finding effective treatment. Bias reduction interventions should target health care professionals in rural communities where such efforts may have the most pronounced impact on improving health care access.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Because deaths from opioid overdoses have increased in the United States, family physicians are needed who can provide integrated care for a patient with HIV, hepatitis C, and opioid use disorder. We sought to describe the individual and residency characteristics of graduating family medicine residents who intend to practice such integrated care. METHODS: We used 2017-2021 data from the American Board of Family Medicine Initial Certification Questionnaire. Our primary outcomes were individual and residency characteristics of resident graduates who intended to provide integrated care. We used logistic regression to assess independent associations with providing integrated care. RESULTS: The response rate was 100% with 18,479 total respondents. After exclusions, our final sample size was 10,660 (57.7%) respondents. Of those, 782 (7.3%) respondents intended to practice integrated care. Using regression analyses, we found that resident graduates who intended to provide integrated care were more likely to be male, non-Hispanic or Latinx. After residency, they were more likely to intend to practice at a federally qualified health center, Indian Health Service, or nonfederal government clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Only 7% of residency graduates reported their intention to provide integrated care for people with opioid use disorder after residency. In response to a surging opioid crisis, policymakers, residency educators, and residency funders/sponsors should increase the workforce of family physicians who can provide this integrated care.

Background: Opioids accounted for 75% of drug overdoses in the United States in 2020, with rural states particularly impacted by the opioid crisis. While medication assisted treatment (MAT) with Suboxone remains one of the more efficacious treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), approximately 40% of people receiving Suboxone for outpatient MAT for OUD (MOUD) relapse within the first 6 months of treatment. We developed the smartphone app-based intervention OptiMAT as an adjunctive intervention to improve MOUD outcomes. The aims of this study are to (1) evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive OptiMAT use in reducing opioid misuse among people receiving MOUD; and (2) evaluate the role of specific OpitMAT features in reducing opioid misuse, including the use of GPS-driven just-in-time intervention. Methods: We will conduct a two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled trial of adults receiving outpatient MOUD in the greater Little Rock AR area. Participants are English-speaking adults ages 18 or older recently enrolled in outpatient MOUD at one of our participating study clinics. Participants will be allocated via 1:1 randomized block design to (1) MOUD with adjunctive use of OptiMAT (MOUD+OptiMAT) or (2) MOUD without OptiMAT (MOUD-only). Our blinded research statistician will evaluate differences between the two groups in opioid misuse (as determined by quantitative urinalysis conducted by clinical lab staff blinded to group membership) during the 6-months following study enrolment. Secondary analyses will evaluate if OptiMAT-usage patterns within the MOUD+OptiMAT group predict opioid misuse or continued abstinence. Discussion: This study will test if adjunctive use of OptiMAT improve MOUD outcomes. Study findings could lead to expansion of OptiMAT into rural clinical settings, and the identification of OptiMAT features which best predict positive clinical outcome could lead to refinement of this and similar smartphone appbased interventions. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05336188, registered March 21, 2022, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05336188.

BACKGROUND: Opioids accounted for 75% of drug overdoses in the USA in 2020, with rural states particularly impacted by the opioid crisis. While medication-assisted treatment (MAT) with Suboxone remains one of the more efficacious treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), approximately 40% of people receiving Suboxone for outpatient MAT for OUD (MOUD) relapse within the first 6 months of treatment. We developed the smartphone app-based intervention OptiMAT as an adjunctive intervention to improve MOUD outcomes. The aims of this study are to (1) evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive OptiMAT use in reducing opioid misuse among people receiving MOUD and (2) evaluate the role of specific OptiMAT features in reducing opioid misuse, including the use of GPS-driven just-in-time intervention. METHODS: We will conduct a two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled trial of adults receiving outpatient MOUD in the greater Little Rock AR area. Participants are English-speaking adults ages 18 or older recently enrolled in outpatient MOUD at one of our participating study clinics. Participants will be allocated via 1:1 randomized block design to (1) MOUD with adjunctive use of OptiMAT (MOUD+OptiMAT) or (2) MOUD without OptiMAT (MOUD-only). Our blinded research statistician will evaluate differences between the two groups in opioid misuse (as determined by quantitative urinalysis conducted by clinical lab staff blinded to group membership) during the 6-months following study enrolment. Secondary analyses will evaluate if OptiMAT-usage patterns within the MOUD+OptiMAT group predict opioid misuse or continued abstinence. DISCUSSION: This study will test if adjunctive use of OptiMAT improve MOUD outcomes. Study findings could lead to expansion of OptiMAT into rural clinical settings, and the identification of OptiMAT features which best predict positive clinical outcome could lead to refinement of this and similar smartphone app-based interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05336188 , registered March 21, 2022.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdose deaths are increasing rapidly in the United States. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are effective and can be delivered in primary care, but uptake has been limited in rural communities. Referral to and coordination with an external telemedicine (TM) vendor by rural primary care clinics for MOUD (TM-MOUD) may increase MOUD access for rural patients, but we know little about perspectives on this model among key stakeholders. As part of a TM-MOUD feasibility study, we explored TM-MOUD acceptability and feasibility among personnel and patients from seven rural primary care clinics and a TM-MOUD vendor. METHODS: We conducted virtual interviews or focus groups with clinic administrators (n = 7 interviews), clinic primary care and behavioral health providers (8 groups, n = 30), other clinic staff (9 groups, n = 37), patients receiving MOUD (n = 16 interviews), TM-MOUD vendor staff (n = 4 interviews), and vendor-affiliated behavioral health and prescribing providers (n = 17 interviews). We asked about experiences with and acceptability of MOUD (primarily buprenorphine) and telemedicine (TM) and a TM-MOUD referral and coordination model. We conducted content analysis to identify themes and participants quantitatively rated acceptability of TM-MOUD elements on a 4-item scale. RESULTS: Perceived benefits of vendor-based TM-MOUD included reduced logistical barriers, more privacy and less stigma, and access to services not available locally (e.g., counseling, pain management). Barriers included lack of internet or poor connectivity in patients' homes, limited communication and trust between TM-MOUD and clinic providers, and questions about the value to the clinic of TM-MOUD referral to external vendor. Acceptability ratings for TM-MOUD were generally high; they were lowest among frontline staff. CONCLUSIONS: Rural primary care clinic personnel, TM-MOUD vendor personnel, and patients generally perceived referral from primary care to a TM-MOUD vendor to hold potential for increasing access to MOUD in rural communities. Increasing TM-MOUD uptake requires buy-in and understanding among staff of the TM-MOUD workflow, TM services offered, requirements for patients, advantages over clinic-based or TM services from clinic providers, and identification of appropriate patients. Poverty, along with patient hesitation to initiate treatment, creates substantial barriers to MOUD treatment generally; insufficient internet availability creates a substantial barrier to TM-MOUD.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-related overdose deaths have risen sharply among young adults. Despite this increase, access to evidence-based medication for opioid agonist treatment (OAT) for youth remains low. Among older adults, barriers to OAT include the paucity of buprenorphine-waivered prescribers and low rates of prescribing among waivered physicians. We have increasingly found in our clinical practice significant stigma related to using OAT to treat addiction for young adults. In this series, we describe three cases of young adults who faced significant stigma related to their treatment. CASE PRESENTATIONS: The first case is a young male with a history of significant trauma and a severe opioid use disorder. He started buprenorphine and has found a job, stayed abstinent, and began a healthy relationship. At each step in his recovery, he has faced resistance to taking medication from other treatment providers, directors of sober houses, and his parents. The second case is a young woman who presented to a substance use treatment program after a relapse. She was unable to restart buprenorphine despite our calling to ask that it be restarted. Ultimately, she left against medical advice and was stabilized as an outpatient on buprenorphine. The final case is a young woman who stopped buprenorphine after being told she was "not sober" while attending 12-step group but restarted after conversations with her clinical team. In each case, the patient has continued their medication treatment and are stable. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid-related deaths continue to rise among all age groups, including young adults. Stigma related to medication treatment can be a substantial barrier for many young adult patients but there are concrete steps that providers and communities can take to address this stigma.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) remains a significant public health issue as the number of opioid-related overdose deaths continues to reach new highs each year. Buprenorphine/Naloxone is a medication that has been shown to be highly effective for the treatment of OUD. However, the clinical management of patients on this medication is challenging as many patients discontinue treatment prematurely. We conducted a qualitative study focusing on experienced prescribers of buprenorphine to learn about what they believe are key challenges in prescribing this medication to patients with OUD and related strategies for improving treatment outcomes. METHODS: We conducted two rounds of interviews with 12 prescribers who were either trained as a primary care physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant. These prescribers were recruited from an academically-based treatment program, a community health center, and a commercial substance use disorder treatment facility. Interview data were coded and analyzed in accordance with a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Key findings and related recommendations emerged for patient monitoring, integration of behavioral health with prescribing, patient volume requirements, and use of telehealth. CONCLUSION: The interviews generated a number of recommendations for improving patient outcomes from buprenorphine treatment. Some of these recommendations can be implemented quite readily whereas others entail more substantial resources and time commitments.

BACKGROUND: Veterans involved in the legal system have a high risk of overdose mortality but limited utilization of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). To increase the use of MOUD in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities and reduce overdose mortality, the VHA should incorporate strategies identified by legal-involved veterans to improve quality of care and ensure that their patients' experiences are integrated into care delivery. This study aims to determine strategies to increase use of MOUD from the perspective of legal-involved veterans with a history of opioid use or opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: Between February 2018 and March 2019, we conducted semistructured interviews with 18 veterans with a history of opioid use or OUD and legal involvement (15 men and 3 women; mean age 41, standard deviation 13, range 28-61). Veterans were from 9 geographically dispersed United States VHA facilities. The study analyzed verbatim transcripts using the framework method. The primary focus was themes that represented legal-involved veteran-identified strategies to improve the use of MOUD. RESULTS: The 18 veterans interviewed had legal involvement directly related to their opioid use and most (n = 15; 83%) had previously used MOUD. Veteran-identified strategies to improve access to and use of MOUD included: (1) VHA should provide transportation or telehealth services; (2) legal agencies should increase access to MOUD during incarceration; (3) the VHA should reduce physician turnover; (4) the VHA should improve physician education to deliver compassionate, patient-centered treatment; (5) the VHA should improve veteran education about MOUD; and (6) the VHA should provide social support opportunities to veterans. CONCLUSIONS: Legal-involved veterans provided strategies that can inform and expand MOUD to better meet their needs and the treatment needs of all patients with OUD. The VHA should consider incorporating these strategies into care, and should evaluate their impact on patients' experience, initiation of and retention on medications, and overdose rates.