Literature Collection

IMPORTANCE: In response to the increase in opioid overdose deaths in the United States, many states recently have implemented supply-controlling and harm-reduction policy measures. To date, an updated policy evaluation that considers the full policy landscape has not been conducted. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 6 US state-level drug policies to ascertain whether they are associated with a reduction in indicators of prescription opioid abuse, the prevalence of opioid use disorder and overdose, the prescription of medication-assisted treatment (MAT), and drug overdose deaths. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study used drug overdose mortality data from 50 states obtained from the National Vital Statistics System and claims data from 23 million commercially insured patients in the US between 2007 and 2018. Difference-in-differences analysis using panel matching was conducted to evaluate the prevalence of indicators of prescription opioid abuse, opioid use disorder and overdose diagnosis, the prescription of MAT, and drug overdose deaths before and after implementation of 6 state-level policies targeting the opioid epidemic. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to summarize associations over time for each policy and outcome pair. The data analysis was conducted July 12, 2020. EXPOSURES: State-level drug policy changes to address the increase of opioid-related overdose deaths included prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) access, mandatory PDMPs, pain clinic laws, prescription limit laws, naloxone access laws, and Good Samaritan laws. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The outcomes of interests were quarterly state-level mortality from drug overdoses, known indicators for prescription opioid abuse and doctor shopping, MAT, and prevalence of drug overdose and opioid use disorder. RESULTS: This cross-sectional study of drug overdose mortality data and insurance claims data from 23 million commercially insured patients (12 582 378 female patients [55.1%]; mean [SD] age, 45.9 [19.9] years) in the US between 2007 and 2018 found that mandatory PDMPs were associated with decreases in the proportion of patients taking opioids (-0.729%; 95% CI, -1.011% to -0.447%), with overlapping opioid claims (-0.027%; 95% CI, -0.038% to -0.017%), with daily morphine milligram equivalent greater than 90 (-0.095%; 95% CI, -0.150% to -0.041%), and who engaged in drug seeking (-0.002%; 95% CI, -0.003% to -0.001%). The proportion of patients receiving MAT increased after the enactment of mandatory PDMPs (0.015%; 95% CI, 0.002% to 0.028%), pain clinic laws (0.013%, 95% CI, 0.005%-0.021%), and prescription limit laws (0.034%, 95% CI, 0.020% to 0.049%). Mandatory PDMPs were associated with a decrease in the number of overdose deaths due to natural opioids (-518.5 [95% CI, -728.5 to -308.5] per 300 million people) and methadone (-122.7 [95% CI, -207.5 to -37.8] per 300 million people). Prescription drug monitoring program access policies showed similar results, although these policies were also associated with increases in overdose deaths due to synthetic opioids (380.3 [95% CI, 149.6-610.8] per 300 million people) and cocaine (103.7 [95% CI, 28.0-179.5] per 300 million people). Except for the negative association between prescription limit laws and synthetic opioid deaths (-723.9 [95% CI, -1419.7 to -28.1] per 300 million people), other policies were associated with increasing overdose deaths, especially those attributed to non-prescription opioids such as synthetic opioids and heroin. This includes a positive association between naloxone access laws and the number of deaths attributed to synthetic opioids (1338.2 [95% CI, 662.5 to 2014.0] per 300 million people). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although this study found that existing state policies were associated with reduced misuse of prescription opioids, they may have the unintended consequence of motivating those with opioid use disorders to access the illicit drug market, potentially increasing overdose mortality. This finding suggests that there is no easy policy solution to reverse the epidemic of opioid dependence and mortality in the US.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use is a significant problem in Alaska. Medication-assisted treatment for opioid use, including buprenorphine, reduces withdrawal symptoms and the harm associated with opioid abuse. Understanding consumers' treatment-seeking process is important for addressing barriers to treatment, facilitating effective service utilization, and informing policy. METHODS: To understand treatment-seeking behavior, we examined the attitudes, perceptions, and knowledge of those who would benefit from the medication-assisted treatment (MAT) buprenorphine. Qualitative data from 2 focus groups (each including 4 participants) and 3 in-depth interviews with people who have used or considered using buprenorphine in treatment for an opioid use disorder were analyzed using grounded theory and directed content analysis approaches. RESULTS: Key findings suggest that individual (withdrawal process, individual motivation) and systemic (sociocultural, political, societal values) factors frame the treatment seeking process. Participants' progress on the treatment-seeking road was affected by models of addiction and MAT, which related to facilitators and barriers encountered in seeking treatment (e.g. support, resources, treatment structure). These factors shaped the longer-term road to recovery, which was seen as on ongoing process. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest it is crucial for interventionists to take a contextual approach that considers individual and systemic factors involved in opioid addiction, treatment, and recovery. This study highlights ways policy makers and treatment providers can address the barriers consumers face in their treatment-seeking process in order to increase treatment access.

Primary Health Networks (PHNs) are a new institution for health systems management in the Australian healthcare system. PHNs will play a key role in mental health reform through planning and commissioning primary mental health services at a regional level, specifically adopting a stepped care approach. Selected PHNs are also trialling a healthcare homes approach. Little is known about the systems levers that could be applied by PHNs to achieve these aims. A rapid review of academic and grey literature published between 2006 and 2016 was undertaken to describe the use of systems levers in commissioning primary care services. Fifty-six documents met the inclusion criteria, including twelve specific to primary mental healthcare. Twenty-six levers were identified. Referral management, contracts and tendering processes, and health information systems were identified as useful levers for implementing stepped care approaches. Location, enrolment, capitation and health information systems were identified as useful in implementing a healthcare homes approach. Other levers were relevant to overall health system functioning. Further work is needed to develop a robust evidence-base for systems levers. PHNs can facilitate this by documenting and evaluating the levers that they deploy, and making their findings available to researchers and other commissioning bodies.