Literature Collection

Background: The opioid epidemic continues to erode communities across Pennsylvania (PA). Federal and PA state programs developed grants to establish Hub and Spoke programs for the expansion of medications for opioid use disorders (MOUD). Employing the telementoring platform Project ECHO (Extension for Community Health Outcomes), Penn State Health engaged the other seven grant awardees in a Collaborative Health Systems (CHS) ECHO. We conducted key informant interviews to better understand impact of the CHS ECHO on health systems collaboration and opioid crisis efforts. Methods: For eight one-hour sessions, each awardee presented their unique strategies, challenges, and opportunities. Using REDCap, program characteristics, such as number of waivered prescribers and number of patients served were collected at baseline. After completion of the sessions, key informant interviews were conducted to assess the impact of CHS ECHO on awardee's programs. Results: Analysis of key informant interviews revealed important themes to address opioid crisis efforts, including the need for strategic and proactive program reevaluation and the convenience of collaborative peer learning networks. Participants expressed benefits of the CHS ECHO including allowing space for discussion of challenges and best practices and facilitating conversation on collaborative targeted advocacy and systems-level improvements. Participants further reported bolstered motivation and confidence. Conclusions: Utilizing Project ECHO provided a bidirectional platform of learning and support that created important connections between institutions working to combat the opioid epidemic. CHS ECHO was a unique opportunity for productive and convenient peer learning across external partners. Open dialogue developed during CHS ECHO can continue to direct systems-levels improvements that benefit individual and population outcomes.

Opioid use is a major problem in India and has high morbidity and mortality with a prevalence of 2.06%. There is a huge treatment gap for opioid use disorders (OUDs). Due to limited mental health resources and limited psychiatric training of medical practitioners in OUDs, a significant proportion of patients do not receive appropriate medical intervention. This article demonstrates how a primary care doctor working in a remote opioid substitution therapy (OST) clinic received assistance from the optional opioid module of clinical schedule for primary care psychiatry (CSP) and collaborative video consultation (CVC) module to address specific difficulties of patients already on Buprenorphine OST and improve the quality of care, thereby reducing chances of relapses. CVC module is a part of one-year digitally driven primary care psychiatry program designed by National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), Bengaluru. The opioid module was designed by NIMHANS, Bengaluru in collaboration with the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi These observations warrant replication of this approach across diverse settings and at a larger scale to explore and evaluate its impact and effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine-delivered buprenorphine (tele-buprenorphine) can potentially increase access to buprenorphine for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, but we know little about use in clinical care. METHODS: This study was a retrospective national cohort study of veterans diagnosed with opioid use disorder (OUD) receiving buprenorphine treatment from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in fiscal years 2012-2019. The study examined trends in use of tele-buprenorphine and compared demographic and clinical characteristics in patients who received tele-buprenorphine versus those who received in-person treatment only. RESULTS: Utilization of tele-buprenorphine increased from 2.29% of buprenorphine patients in FY2012 (n = 187) to 7.96% (n = 1352) in FY2019 in VHA veterans nationally. Compared to patients receiving only in-person care, tele-buprenorphine patients were less likely to be male (AOR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.73-0.98) or Black (AOR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.45-0.65). Tele-buprenorphine patients were more likely to be treated in community-based outpatient clinics rather than large medical centers (AOR = 2.91, 95% CI: 2.67-3.17) and to live in rural areas (AOR = 2.12, 95% CI:1.92-2.35). The median days supplied of buprenorphine treatment was 722 (interquartile range: 322-1459) among the tele-buprenorphine patients compared to 295 (interquartile range: 67-854) among patients who received treatment in-person. CONCLUSIONS: Use of telemedicine to deliver buprenorphine treatment in VHA increased 3.5-fold between 2012 and 2019, though overall use remained low prior to COVID-19. Tele-buprenorphine is a promising modality especially when treatment access is limited. However, we must continue to understand how practitioners and patient are using telemedicine and how these patients' outcomes compare to those using in-person care.

IMPORTANCE: Guidelines recommend that adult patients receive screening for alcohol and drug use during primary care visits, but the adoption of screening in routine practice remains low. Clinics frequently struggle to choose a screening approach that is best suited to their resources, workflows, and patient populations. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how to best implement electronic health record (EHR)-integrated screening for substance use by comparing commonly used screening methods and examining their association with implementation outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This article presents the outcomes of phases 3 and 4 of a 4-phase quality improvement, implementation feasibility study in which researchers worked with stakeholders at 6 primary care clinics in 2 large urban academic health care systems to define and implement their optimal screening approach. Site A was located in New York City and comprised 2 clinics, and site B was located in Boston, Massachusetts, and comprised 4 clinics. Clinics initiated screening between January 2017 and October 2018, and 93 114 patients were eligible for screening for alcohol and drug use. Data used in the analysis were collected between January 2017 and October 2019, and analysis was performed from July 13, 2018, to March 23, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Clinics integrated validated screening questions and a brief counseling script into the EHR, with implementation supported by the use of clinical champions (ie, clinicians who advocate for change, motivate others, and use their expertise to facilitate the adoption of an intervention) and the training of clinic staff. Clinics varied in their screening approaches, including the type of visit targeted for screening (any visit vs annual examinations only), the mode of administration (staff-administered vs self-administered by the patient), and the extent to which they used practice facilitation and EHR usability testing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Data from the EHRs were extracted quarterly for 12 months to measure implementation outcomes. The primary outcome was screening rate for alcohol and drug use. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of unhealthy alcohol and drug use detected via screening, and clinician adoption of a brief counseling script. RESULTS: Patients of the 6 clinics had a mean (SD) age ranging from 48.9 (17.3) years at clinic B2 to 59.1 (16.7) years at clinic B3, were predominantly female (52.4% at clinic A1 to 64.6% at clinic A2), and were English speaking. Racial diversity varied by location. Of the 93,114 patients with primary care visits, 71.8% received screening for alcohol use, and 70.5% received screening for drug use. Screening at any visit (implemented at site A) in comparison with screening at annual examinations only (implemented at site B) was associated with higher screening rates for alcohol use (90.3%-94.7% vs 24.2%-72.0%, respectively) and drug use (89.6%-93.9% vs 24.6%-69.8%). The 5 clinics that used a self-administered screening approach had a higher detection rate for moderate- to high-risk alcohol use (14.7%-36.6%) compared with the 1 clinic that used a staff-administered screening approach (1.6%). The detection of moderate- to high-risk drug use was low across all clinics (0.5%-1.0%). Clinics with more robust practice facilitation and EHR usability testing had somewhat greater adoption of the counseling script for patients with moderate-high risk alcohol or drug use (1.4%-12.5% vs 0.1%-1.1%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this quality improvement study, EHR-integrated screening was feasible to implement in all clinics and unhealthy alcohol use was detected more frequently when self-administered screening was used at any primary care visit. The detection of drug use was low at all clinics, as was clinician adoption of counseling. These findings can be used to inform the decision-making of health care systems that are seeking to implement screening for substance use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02963948.