Literature Collection

Background: Despite lifesaving medications such as buprenorphine and methadone, the majority of individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) face access barriers to evidence-based treatment. COVID-19 era regulatory reforms have shown that telehealth can improve access to care, although disparities in clinical outcomes are likely to persist.Objective: We aimed to analyze 180-day and 365-day retention in treatment with buprenorphine for OUD overall and by demographics, hypothesizing that retention would be lower among racial/ethnic minorities and rural patients.Methods: We analyzed data from a cohort of individuals with OUD enrolled in treatment from April 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021, in Pennsylvania and New York using a virtual-first telehealth OUD treatment platform to assess rates of 180-day and 365-day retention. Associations between demographic characteristics and retention were assessed using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models.Results: Among 1,378 patients (58.8% male), 180-day retention was 56.4%, and 365-day retention was 48.3%. Adjusted analyses found that only an association between older age and greater odds of 180-day retention was significant (aOR for patients aged 30-50 vs. <30: 1.83 [1.37-2.45]). There were no significant associations between sex, race/ethnicity, state, or rurality with retention.Conclusion: While we were unable to control for socioeconomic variables, we found retention within telehealth services for buprenorphine was high irrespective of geography or race/ethnicity, but disparities with age indicate a subset of patients who may benefit from more intensive services early in care.

IMPORTANCE: Methadone treatment (MT) fails to address the emotion dysregulation, pain, and reward processing deficits that often drive opioid use disorder (OUD). New interventions are needed to address these factors. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of MT as usual (usual care) vs telehealth Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) plus usual care among people with an OUD and pain. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was a randomized clinical trial conducted from August 2020 to June 2022. Participants receiving MT for OUD and experiencing chronic pain were recruited at 5 clinics in New Jersey. INTERVENTIONS: In usual care, participants received MT, including medication and counseling. Participants receiving MORE plus usual care attended 8 weekly, 2-hour telehealth groups that provided training in mindfulness, reappraisal, and savoring in addition to usual care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURE: Primary outcomes were return to drug use and MT dropout over 16 weeks. Secondary outcomes were days of drug use, methadone adherence, pain, depression, and anxiety. Analyses were based on an intention-to-treat approach. RESULTS: A total of 154 participants (mean [SD] age, 48.5 [11.8] years; 88 female [57%]) were included in the study. Participants receiving MORE plus usual care had significantly less return to drug use (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.90; P = .02) and MT dropout (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.18-0.96; P = .04) than those receiving usual care only after adjusting for a priori-specified covariates (eg, methadone dose and recent drug use, at baseline). A total of 44 participants (57.1%) in usual care and 39 participants (50.6%) in MORE plus usual care returned to drug use. A total of 17 participants (22.1%) in usual care and 10 participants (13.0%) in MORE plus usual care dropped out of MT. In zero-inflated models, participants receiving MORE plus usual care had significantly fewer days of any drug use (ratio of means = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.53-0.63; P < .001) than those receiving usual care only through 16 weeks. A significantly greater percentage of participants receiving MORE plus usual care maintained methadone adherence (64 of 67 [95.5%]) at the 16-week follow-up than those receiving usual care only (56 of 67 [83.6%]; χ2 = 4.49; P = .04). MORE reduced depression scores and ecological momentary assessments of pain through the 16-week follow-up to a significantly greater extent than usual care (group × time F2,272 = 3.13; P = .05 and group × time F16,13000 = 6.44; P < .001, respectively). Within the MORE plus usual care group, EMA pain ratings decreased from a mean (SD) of 5.79 (0.29) at baseline to 5.17 (0.30) at week 16; for usual care only, pain decreased from 5.19 (0.28) at baseline to 4.96 (0.29) at week 16. Within the MORE plus usual care group, mean (SD) depression scores were 22.52 (1.32) at baseline and 18.98 (1.38) at 16 weeks. In the usual care-only group, mean (SD) depression scores were 22.65 (1.25) at baseline and 20.03 (1.27) at 16 weeks. Although anxiety scores increased in the usual care-only group and decreased in the MORE group, this difference between groups did not reach significance (group × time unadjusted F2,272 = 2.10; P= .12; Cohen d = .44; adjusted F2,268 = 2.33; P = .09). Within the MORE plus usual care group, mean (SD) anxiety scores were 25.5 (1.60) at baseline and 23.45 (1.73) at 16 weeks. In the usual care-only group, mean (SD) anxiety scores were 23.27 (1.75) at baseline and 24.07 (1.73) at 16 weeks. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This randomized clinical trial demonstrated that telehealth MORE was a feasible adjunct to MT with significant effects on drug use, pain, depression, treatment retention, and adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04491968.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) may include a combination of pharmacotherapies (such as buprenorphine) with counseling services if clinically indicated. Medication management or engagement with in-person counseling services may be hindered by logistical and financial barriers. Telehealth may provide an alternative mechanism for continued engagement. This study aimed to evaluate the association between telehealth encounters and time to discontinuation of buprenorphine treatment when compared to traditional in-person visits and to evaluate potential effect modification by rural-urban designation and in-person and telehealth combination treatment. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of Veterans diagnosed with OUD and treated with buprenorphine across all facilities within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) between 2008 and 2017. Exposures were telehealth and in-person encounters for substance use disorder (SUD) and mental health, treated as time-varying covariates. The primary outcome was treatment discontinuation, evaluated as 14 days of absence of medication from initiation through 1 year. RESULTS: Compared to in-person encounters, treatment discontinuation was lower for telehealth for SUD (aHR: 0.69; 95%CI: 0.60, 0.78) and mental health (aHR: 0.69; 95%CI: 0.62, 0.76). There was no evidence of effect modification by rural-urban designation. Risk of treatment discontinuation appeared to be lower among those with telehealth only compared to in-person only for both SUD (aHR: 0.48, 95%CI: 0.37, 0.62) and for mental health (aHR: 0.46; 95%CI: 0.33, 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: As telehealth demonstrated improved treatment retention compared to in-person visits, it may be a suitable option for engagement for patients in OUD management. Efforts to expand services may improve treatment retention and health outcomes for VHA and other health care systems.

OBJECTIVE: Contingency management (CM) is the gold standard treatment for stimulant use disorder but typically requires twice- to thrice-weekly in-person treatment visits to objectively verify abstinence and deliver therapeutic incentives. There has been growing interest in telehealth-based delivery of CM to support broad access to this essential intervention--a need that has been emphatically underscored by the COVID-19 pandemic. Herein, we present observations from initial efforts to develop and test a protocol for telehealth-based delivery of prize-based CM treatment incentivizing stimulant abstinence. METHOD: Four participants engaged in hybrid courses of CM, including one or more telehealth-based treatment sessions, involving self-administered oral fluid testing to confirm abstinence. Observations from initial participants informed iterative improvements to telehealth procedures, and a 12-week course of telehealth-based CM was subsequently offered to two additional participants to further evaluate preliminary feasibility and acceptability. RESULTS: In most cases, participants were able to successfully join telehealth treatment sessions, self-administer oral fluid testing, and share oral fluid test results to verify stimulant abstinence. However, further improvements in telehealth-based toxicology testing may be necessary to interpret test results accurately and reliably, especially when colorimetric immunoassay results reflect substance concentrations near the cutoff for point-of-care testing devices. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings suggest that telehealth-based CM is sufficiently feasible and acceptable to support future development, in particular through improved methods for remote interpretation and verification of test results. This is especially important in CM, wherein accurate and reliable detection of both early and sustained abstinence is crucial for appropriate delivery of therapeutic incentives.

Objective: The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)-funded health centers provide critical behavioral health services to historically and medically underserved individuals with complex health and social needs. As health centers rapidly expanded telehealth in response to COVID-19, the objective of the study was to assess whether telehealth use was associated with utilization and continuity within mental health care received by patients of HRSA-funded health centers. Methods: Cross-sectional analyses, using a nationally representative sample of adult patients with mental health needs from the 2022 Health Center Patient Survey (n = 1,044), explored associations between telehealth use and utilization of mental health services from primary care providers (PCP) and continuity of counseling services. Multivariate logistic regression models accounted for predisposing, enabling, and need factors to assess the influence of telehealth use on utilization and continuity outcomes. Results: After adjusting for patient-level factors, telehealth users with mental health needs had statistically significant and higher odds of receiving mental health services from a PCP at a health center compared with nontelehealth users (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 2.60, p < 0.001; 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.50, 4.52]). Telehealth-using patients receiving counseling services had statistically significant and higher odds of receiving all counseling services at a health center compared with nontelehealth users (aOR = 3.65, p < 0.001, 95% CI [2.04, 6.53]). Conclusions: Telehealth facilitates mental health care utilization and continuity for historically and medically underserved patients at health centers and can be an important tool for care management and coordination for patients with mental health needs, particularly during and following public health emergencies.

BackgroundThe prevalence of chronic diseases in children and adolescents has significantly increased. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated telemedicine adoption, leading to improved healthcare access and outcomes. Despite its benefits, telemedicine is still not fully integrated into standard care. Previous reviews have been limited in scope. This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of recent trials on web or app-based telemedicine for chronically ill children and adolescents, identifying interventions and outcomes for future healthcare strategies.MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed on November 21, 2023, and updated on January 9, 2025. Results were filtered to include prospective intervention studies involving children and adolescents with chronic conditions and limited to publications from 2017 onwards. A total of 8699 results were retrieved, and 1506 titles were screened for eligibility, resulting in 116 studies included in the review.ResultsThese studies covered 45 different conditions, with the highest numbers for diabetes, asthma, and obesity. Telemedicine interventions varied, including gamification, video meetings, integrated devices, psychological components, symptom tracking, and educational content. Most studies reported high feasibility and patient satisfaction. Clinical outcomes improved in some cases, and none were worse than standard care. The heterogeneity limited direct comparisons and meta-analysis, and small sample sizes in many studies affected the generalizability and statistical significance of the findings.ConclusionsOur study highlights the potential of telemedicine in managing chronic illnesses among children, emphasizing the need for standardized methodologies, larger sample sizes, and continued investment in infrastructure and equitable policies to fully realize its benefits in improving accessibility, convenience, cost savings, and overall health outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Future telemedicine reimbursement is uncertain. Knowing which patients may be most reliant on telemedicine can help assess its value. OBJECTIVE: To identify the patient characteristics associated with using only telemedicine for primary care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study of individuals who had multiple primary care visits in 2022. PATIENTS: A total of 1,151,984 adult patients with two or more primary care visits seeking care at a large integrated health system in Northern California in 2022. MAIN MEASURES: Primary care visit modality (only telemedicine, or any in-person); associations (in adjusted percentages) between characteristics and the likelihood of accessing primary care via telemedicine only. KEY RESULTS: Most patients (n = 812,581, 70.5%) used telemedicine in 2022, with 55.1% (n = 635,208) having both telemedicine and in-person visits, and 15.4% (n = 117,373) having only telemedicine visits. As adjusted percentages, 23.5% of patients 18-44 years old (95% CI, 23.3-23.6%) used only telemedicine primary care visits, a significantly higher proportion than younger (< 18-4.7%; 95% CI 4.6-4.8%) or older age groups (45-64-17.6%; 95% CI 17.5-17.8%; 65-74-13.4%; 95% CI 13.2-13.5%; 75 + -14.5%, 95% CI 14.3-14.7%). Patients who were female (16.6%, CI 16.5-16.7% vs. male 13.8%, 95% CI 13.8-13.9%), Black (17.0%, 95% CI 16.9-17.3% vs. White 15.5%, 95% CI 15.4-15.6%), living in low-SES neighborhoods (15.8%, 95% CI 15.6-15.9% vs. higher 15.4%, 95% CI 15.3-15.4%), with longer drive times to clinic (11-20 min-15.4%, 95% CI 15.3-15.5%; 20 + min-17.7%, 95% CI 17.5-17.8%) or with a clinic parking fee (16.7%, 95% CI 16.5-17.0% vs. free 15.3%, 95% CI 15.2-15.4%) were more likely to only use telemedicine to access primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine may have facilitated access to primary care for patients that have barriers to in-person care.