Literature Collection

BACKGROUND: Office-based opioid treatment with buprenorphine has emerged as a popular evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder. Unfortunately, psychosocial stress, anxiety, pain, and co-morbid substance use increase patients' risk for relapse. We designed this study to compare the effects of complementing buprenorphine treatment with 24 weeks of a live-online Mindful Recovery Opioid Care Continuum (M-ROCC) group to a time and attention-matched, live-online Recovery Support Group (RSG) active control condition. METHODS: We plan to enroll a maximum of N = 280 and randomize at least N = 192 patients prescribed buprenorphine through referrals from office-based and telemedicine buprenorphine treatment providers and social media advertisements. Participants will be randomly assigned to M-ROCC or RSG and will be blinded to their treatment condition. The primary outcome for this study will be biochemically confirmed periods of abstinence from illicit opioids, as measured by self-reported use and randomly collected, video-observed oral fluid toxicology testing during the final 12 weeks of study participation. Secondary outcomes include changes in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) anxiety and pain interference scores between baseline and week 24. RESULTS: The trial was funded by the National Institutes of Health, HEAL Initiative through NCCIH (R33AT010125). Data collection is projected to end by September 2023, and we expect publication of results in 2024. CONCLUSION: If the M-ROCC intervention is found to be effective in this format, it will demonstrate that live-online mindfulness groups can improve outcomes and address common co-morbidities like anxiety and pain during buprenorphine treatment.

BACKGROUND: Community stigma against people with opioid use disorder (OUD) and intervention stigma (e.g., toward naloxone) exacerbate the opioid overdose crisis. We examined the effects of the Communities that HEAL (CTH) intervention on perceived opioid-related community stigma by stakeholders in the HEALing Communities Study (HCS). METHODS: We collected three surveys from community coalition members in 66 communities across four states participating in HCS. Communities were randomized into Intervention (Wave 1) or Wait-list Control (Wave 2) arms. We conducted multilevel linear mixed models to compare changes in primary outcomes of community stigma toward people treated for OUD, naloxone, and medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) by arm from time 1 (before the start of the intervention) to time 3 (end of the intervention period in the Intervention arm). FINDINGS: Intervention stakeholders reported a larger decrease in perceived community stigma toward people treated for OUD (adjusted mean change (AMC) -3.20 [95% C.I. -4.43, -1.98]) and toward MOUD (AMC -0.33 [95% C.I. -0.56, -0.09]) than stakeholders in Wait-list Control communities (AMC -0.18 [95% C.I. -1.38, 1.02], p = 0.0007 and AMC 0.11 [95% C.I. -0.09, 0.31], p = 0.0066). The relationship between intervention status and change in stigma toward MOUD was moderated by rural-urban status (urban AMC -0.59 [95% CI, -0.87, -0.32], rural AMC not sig.) and state. The difference in stigma toward naloxone between Intervention and Wait-list Control stakeholders was not statistically significant (p = 0.18). INTERPRETATION: The CTH intervention decreased stakeholder perceptions of community stigma toward people treated for OUD and stigma toward MOUD. Implementing the CTH intervention in other communities could decrease OUD stigma across diverse settings nationally. FUNDING: US National Institute on Drug Abuse.