Literature Collection

INTRODUCTION: Recent studies from urban academic centers have shown the promise of emergency physician-initiated buprenorphine for improving outcomes in opioid use disorder (OUD) patients. We investigated whether emergency physician-initiated buprenorphine in a rural, community setting decreases subsequent healthcare utilization for OUD patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients presenting to a community hospital emergency department (ED) who received a prescription for buprenorphine from June 15, 2018-June 15, 2019. Demographic and opioid-related International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, (ICD-10) codes were documented and used to create a case-matched control cohort of demographically matched patients who presented in a similar time frame with similar ICD-10 codes but did not receive buprenorphine. We recorded 12-month rates of ED visits, all-cause hospitalizations, and opioid overdoses. Differences in event occurrences between groups were assessed with Poisson regression. RESULTS: Overall 117 patients were included in the study: 59 who received buprenorphine vs 58 controls. The groups were well matched, both roughly 90% White and 60% male, with an average age of 33.4 years for both groups. Controls had a median two ED visits (range 0-33), median 0.5 hospitalizations (range 0-8), and 0 overdoses (range 0-3), vs median one ED visit (range 0-8), median 0 hospitalizations (range 0-4), and median 0 overdoses (range 0-3) in the treatment group. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) for counts of ED visits was 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49, 0.75, favoring medication-assisted treatment (MAT). For hospitalizations, IRR was 0.34, 95% CI, 0.22, 0.52 favoring MAT, and for overdoses was 1.04, 95% CI, 0.53, 2.07. CONCLUSION: Initiation of buprenorphine by ED providers was associated with lower 12-month ED visit and all-cause hospitalization rates with comparable overdose rates compared to controls. These findings show the ED's potential as an initiation point for medication-assisted treatment in OUD patients.

Background: The use of the natural product, kratom, has increased significantly in recent years. The active compounds in kratom have been shown to produce both opioid and stimulant-like effects. While kratom is marketed as a safe, non-addictive method to treat pain and opioid withdrawal, there have been reports demonstrating that kratom is physiologically addictive and linked to overdose deaths. A limited number of case-reports are available describing treatment of kratom use disorder in middle-aged adults, generally in the context of chronic pain and in inpatient settings. Our case is unique in that we describe outpatient treatment of kratom use disorder in a young adult with comorbid attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and in the absence of chronic pain. Case: A 20-year-old college student with ADHD presented to an office-based opioid agonist treatment clinic (OBOT) for treatment of kratom use disorder. He was unable to attend inpatient or residential substance use treatment due to work and school obligations. Additionally, he had stopped taking his prescribed stimulant due to cardiac side effects. The OBOT team successfully initiated buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP/NAL) sublingual films via home induction to treat his kratom use disorder. The patient is being monitored monthly with plans to slowly taper his BUP/NAL dose as tolerated. Discussion: We present a case of a young adult male with kratom use disorder, complicated by a diagnosis of ADHD, successfully treated with BUP/NAL via home induction. The patient is currently kratom-free, reports improved mood and sleep patterns since initiating BUP/NAL, and is able to once again tolerate his ADHD stimulant medication. Healthcare providers should be aware of the use of kratom and consider utilizing BUP/NAL to treat dependence to this botanical drug.

Opioid-involved drug overdose deaths have been a growing concern in the United States for several decades. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention identified several strategies to address the opioid overdose epidemic, including increased availability of and access to medication-assisted treatment and guidance on safer opioid prescribing practices. Telehealth offers the potential for increasing access and availability to these strategies, and laws governing telehealth have implications for their utilization. To understand how state telehealth laws intersect with the opioid overdose epidemic, we conducted a legal mapping study, a type of legal epidemiological assessment, of statutes and regulations that intersect at telehealth and opioids. This search yielded 28 laws from 17 states. These laws intersect both telehealth and the opioid overdose epidemic in different ways including prescribing limitations, opioid treatment through medication and counseling, patient plan review, and professional collaboration. Continued legal and policy surveillance is needed to be able to evaluate the impact of law in addressing opioid overdose outcomes.

The United States is experiencing an unprecedented opioid crisis, with a record of about 93,000 opioid-involved overdose deaths in 2020, which requires rapid and substantial scaling up of access to effective treatment for opioid use disorder. Only 18% of individuals with opioid use disorder receive evidence-based treatment, and strategies to increase access are hindered by a lack of treatment providers. Using a case study from the largest municipal hospital system in the United States, the authors describe the effects of a workforce shortage on health system responses to the opioid crisis. This national problem demands a multipronged approach, including federal programs to grow and diversify the pipeline of addiction providers, medical education initiatives, and enhanced training and mentorship to increase the capacity of allied clinicians to treat patients who have an opioid use disorder. Workforce development should be combined with structural reforms for integrating addiction treatment into mainstream medical care and with new treatment models, including telehealth, which can lower patient barriers to accessing treatment.

BACKGROUND: Overdose is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among people who inject drugs. Illicitly manufactured fentanyl is now a major driver of opioid overdose deaths. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 participants (19 persons who inject drugs and 4 service providers) from rural southern Illinois. Data were analyzed using constant comparison and theoretical sampling methods. RESULTS: Participants were concerned about the growing presence of fentanyl in both opioids and stimulants, and many disclosed overdose experiences. Strategies participants reported using to lower overdose risk included purchasing drugs from trusted sellers and modifying drug use practices by partially injecting and/or changing the route of transmission. Approximately half of persons who inject drugs sampled had heard of fentanyl test strips, however fentanyl test strip use was low. To reverse overdoses, participants reported using cold water baths. Use of naloxone to reverse overdose was low. Barriers to naloxone access and use included fear of arrest and opioid withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: People who inject drugs understood fentanyl to be a potential contaminant in their drug supply and actively engaged in harm reduction techniques to try to prevent overdose. Interventions to increase harm reduction education and information about and access to fentanyl test strips and naloxone would be beneficial.

OBJECTIVES: The opioid overdose epidemic is escalating. Increasing access to medications for opioid use disorder in primary care is crucial. The impact of the US Department of Health and Human Services' policy change removing the buprenorphine waiver training requirement on primary care buprenorphine prescribing remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the impact of the policy change on primary care providers' likelihood of applying for a waiver and the current attitudes, practices, and barriers to buprenorphine prescribing in primary care. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional survey with embedded educational resources disseminated to primary care providers in a southern US academic health system. We used descriptive statistics to aggregate survey data, logistic regression models to evaluate whether buprenorphine interest and familiarity correlate with clinical characteristics, and a χ(2) test to evaluate the effect of the educational intervention on screening. RESULTS: Of the 54 respondents, 70.4% reported seeing patients with opioid use disorder, but only 11.1% had a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. Few nonwaivered providers were interested in prescribing, but perceiving buprenorphine to be beneficial to the patient population was associated with interest (adjusted odds ratio 34.7, P < 0.001). Two-thirds of nonwaivered respondents reported the policy change having no impact on their decision to obtain a waiver; however, among interested providers, it increased their likelihood of obtaining a waiver. Barriers to buprenorphine prescribing included lack of clinical experience, clinical capacity, and referral resources. Screening for opioid use disorder did not increase significantly after the survey. CONCLUSIONS: Although most primary care providers reported seeing patients with opioid use disorder, interest in prescribing buprenorphine was low and structural barriers remained the dominant obstacles. Providers with a preexisting interest in buprenorphine prescribing reported that removing the training requirement was helpful.

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.

Evidence-based treatment of opioid use disorder, the prevention of opioid overdose and other opioid-related harms, and safe and effective pain management are priorities for the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The VHA Office of Health Services Research and Development hosted a State-of-the-Art Conference on "Effective Management of Pain and Addiction: Strategies to Improve Opioid Safety" on September 10-11, 2019. This conference convened a multidisciplinary group to discuss and achieve consensus on a research agenda and on implementation and policy recommendations to improve opioid safety for Veterans. Participants were organized into three workgroups: (1) managing opioid use disorder; (2) Long-term opioid therapy and opioid tapering; (3) managing co-occurring pain and substance use disorder. Here we summarize the implementation and policy recommendations of each workgroup and highlight important cross-cutting issues related to telehealth, care coordination, and stepped care model implementation.

BACKGROUND: Although opioid agonist therapy is effective in treating opioid use disorders (OUD), retention in opioid agonist therapy is suboptimal, in part, due to quality of care issues. Therefore, we sought to describe the planning and implementation of a quality improvement initiative aimed at closing gaps in care for people living with OUD through changes to workflow and care processes in Vancouver, Canada. METHODS: The Best-practice in Oral Opioid agoniSt Therapy (BOOST) Collaborative followed the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Breakthrough Series Collaborative methodology over 18-months. Teams participated in a series of activities and events to support implementing, measuring, and sharing best practices in OAT and OUD care. Teams were assigned monthly implementation scores to monitor their progress on meeting Collaborative aims and implementing changes. RESULTS: Seventeen health care teams from a range of health care practices caring for a total of 4301 patients with a documented diagnosis of OUD, or suspected OUD based on electronic medical record chart data participated in the Collaborative. Teams followed the Breakthrough Series Collaborative methodology closely and reported monthly on a series of standardized process and outcome indicators. The majority of (59%) teams showed some improvement throughout the Collaborative as indicated by implementation scores. CONCLUSIONS: Descriptive data from the evaluation of this initiative illustrates its success. It provides further evidence to support the implementation of quality improvement interventions to close gaps in OUD care processes and treatment outcomes for people living with OUD. This system-level approach has been spread across British Columbia and could be used by other jurisdictions facing similar overdose crises.