Literature Collection

Opioid dependence is an epidemic in the United States, and the percentage of pregnant women who are opioid dependent has increased dramatically in the last decade. Pain management, already a concern for intrapartum and postpartum care, is complicated in the context of opioid dependence. This clinical review surveys the literature on pain management in opioid-dependent pregnant women to summarize current consensus and evidence to guide clinical practice. Points of consensus for pain management in opioid-dependent pregnant women include continual opioid maintenance therapy throughout the pregnancy and the postpartum period; adequate management of acute pain; the contraindication of opioid agonist-antagonists for pain management; and the need for interdisciplinary teams using a multimodal approach to provide optimal care to opioid-dependent pregnant women.

IMPORTANCE: Care management benefits community-dwelling patients with dementia, but studies include few patients with moderate to severe dementia or from racial and ethnic minority populations, lack palliative care, and seldom reduce health care utilization. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether integrated dementia palliative care reduces dementia symptoms, caregiver depression and distress, and emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations compared with usual care in moderate to severe dementia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized clinical trial of community-dwelling patients with moderate to severe dementia and their caregivers enrolled from March 2019 to December 2020 from 2 sites in central Indiana (2-year follow-up completed on January 7, 2023). Electronic health record screening identified patients with dementia; caregivers confirmed eligibility, including dementia stage. INTERVENTION: The intervention consisted of monthly calls from a trained nurse or social worker and evidence-based protocols to help caregivers manage patients' neuropsychiatric symptoms, caregiver distress, and palliative care issues (eg, advance care planning, symptoms, and hospice) (n = 99). Usual care caregivers received written dementia resource information and patients received care from usual clinicians (n = 102). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q) severity score (scores range from 0-36, with higher scores indicating worse patient symptoms). Secondary outcomes included Symptom Management in End-of-Life Dementia scores, caregiver depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-8) scores, caregiver distress (NPI-Q distress) scores, and combined ED and hospitalization events. Outcomes were assessed quarterly for 24 months or until patient death. RESULTS: A total of 201 dyads were enrolled (patients were 67.7% female; 43.3% African American; mean [SD] age, 83.6 [7.9] years); 3 dyads withdrew and 83 patients died over the course of the study, with at least 90% of eligible dyads in both groups completing each of the quarterly assessments. For the dementia palliative care vs usual care groups, mean NPI-Q severity scores were 9.92 vs 9.41 at baseline and 9.15 vs 9.39 at 24 months, respectively (between-group difference at 24 months, -0.24 [95% CI, -2.33 to 1.84]). There was no significant difference in the rate of change in NPI-Q severity from baseline between groups over time (P = .87 for the group and time interaction). There were no significant differences in the secondary outcomes, except that there were fewer combined ED and hospitalization events in the dementia palliative care group (mean events/patient, 1.06 in dementia palliative care vs 2.37 in usual care; between-group difference, -1.31 [95% CI, -1.93 to -0.69]; relative risk, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.65]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among community-dwelling patients with moderate to severe dementia and their caregivers, dementia palliative care, compared with usual care, did not significantly improve patients' neuropsychiatric symptoms through 24 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03773757.

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.