Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION:Recent findings support the provision of meditation-based interventions (MBIs) in primary care. However, the acceptability of MBI among patients prescribed medications for opioid use disorder (eg, buprenorphine) in primary care remains unclear. This study assessed experiences and preferences for adopting MBI among patients prescribed buprenorphine in office-based opioid treatment (OBOT). METHODS:This 23-item, semistructured cross-sectional survey was administered by study staff to patients enrolled in OBOT (N = 72) and consisted of demographic and clinical characteristics, perceptions, experiences with MBI, and preferred strategies to access MBI to support their treatment on buprenorphine. RESULTS:Most participants reported practicing at least 1 category of MBI (90.3%) on at least a daily (39.6%) or weekly (41.7%) basis including (1) spiritual meditation (eg, centering prayer; 67.7%); (2) nonmantra meditation (eg, comfortable posture; 61.3%); (3) mindfulness meditation (eg, mindfulness-based stress reduction; 54.8%); and (4) mantra meditation (eg, transcendental meditation; 29.0%). Interest in MBI was motivated by improving one's general health and well-being (73.4%), treatment outcomes with medications for OUD (eg, buprenorphine; 60.9%), and relationships with others (60.9%). Perceived clinical benefits of MBI included reduced anxiety or depression symptoms (70.3%), pain (62.5%), illicit substance or alcohol use (60.9%), cravings for illicit substances (57.8%), and opioid-related withdrawal symptoms (51.6%). CONCLUSIONS:Findings from this study indicate high acceptability for adopting MBI among patients prescribed buprenorphine in OBOT. Further research is needed to assess the efficacy of MBI to improve clinical outcomes among patients initiating buprenorphine in OBOT.

Introduction: This mixed-methods study assessed buprenorphine provider and administrator perceptions and experiences in offering telebuprenorphine during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted between June 2021 and September 2021 among telebuprenorphine providers and administrators (N = 16) and assessed for program design and implementation strategies, clinical workflow, patient-level factors influencing program entry and retention, and challenges and solutions to improving clinical care. Results: Clinician (n = 15) and administrator (n = 1) participants identified changes to clinical workflow, including increased administrative tasks to confirm patient receipt of prescribed medications, completion of referrals to community- or specialty treatment, and locating available pharmacies and laboratory services. Challenges consisted of staff redeployment to COVID-19 related responsibilities, prior authorization requirements for buprenorphine prescriptions, billing structures that under-reimbursed for telephone or video visits, and concerns with changes in government regulations. Strategies to improving telebuprenorphine included offering "hotlines" to facilitate same-day visits, expanding between-visit support, establishing workflows with community pharmacies to ensure seamless dispensing of buprenorphine, co-location of behavioral health providers, and distributing donated mobile phones to patients. Suggested technologies for enhancing care included text messaging (75%) and smartphone applications (56.3%). Conclusions: Findings from this study highlight considerable heterogeneity in the delivery of telebuprenorphine services.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:The timeline followback (TLFB) interview is the gold standard for the quantitative assessment of alcohol use. However, self-reported "drinks" can vary in alcohol content. If this variability is not accounted for, it can compromise the reliability and validity of TLFB data. To improve the precision of the TLFB data, we developed a detailed standard operating procedure (SOP) to calculate standard drinks more accurately from participant reports. METHOD/UNASSIGNED:For the new SOP, the volume and alcohol content by volume (ABV) of distinct types of alcoholic beverages were determined based on product websites and other reliable sources. Recipes for specific cocktails were constructed based on recipes from bartending education websites. One standard drink was defined as 0.6 oz (14 g) of absolute alcohol. Standard drink totals were contrasted for the new SOP approach and the standard procedure, which generally assumed that one self-reported drink was equivalent to one standard drink. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Relative to the standard TLFB procedure, higher numbers of standard drinks were reported after implementing the TLFB SOP. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Variability in procedures for conversion of self-reported alcohol consumption to standard drinks can confound the interpretation of TLFB data. The use and reporting of a detailed SOP can significantly reduce the potential for such inconsistencies. Detailed and consistent procedures for calculation of standard drinks can enhance the quality of TLFB drinking data.

BACKGROUND:Evidence maps are emerging data visualization of a systematic review. There are no published evidence maps summarizing opioid use disorder (OUD) interventions. AIM/OBJECTIVE:Our aim was to publish an interactive summary of all peer-reviewed interventional and observational trials assessing the treatment of OUD and common clinical outcomes. METHODS:PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, and Web of Science were queried using multiple OUD-related MESH terms, without date limitations, for English-language publications. Inclusions were human subjects, treatment of OUD, OUD patient or community-level outcomes, and systematic reviews of OUD interventions. Exclusions were laboratory studies, reviews, and case reports. Two reviewers independently scanned abstracts for inclusion before coding eligible full-text articles by pre-specified filters: research design, study population, study setting, intervention, outcomes, sample size, study duration, geographical region, and funding sources. RESULTS:The OUD Evidence Map (https://med.nyu.edu/research/lee-lab/research/opioid-use-disorder-treatment-evidence-map) identified and assessed 12,933 relevant abstracts through 2020. We excluded 9455 abstracts and full text reviewed 2839 manuscripts; 888 were excluded, 1591 were included in the final evidence map. The most studied OUD interventions were methadone (n = 754 studies), buprenorphine (n = 499), and naltrexone (n = 134). The most common outcomes were heroin/opioid use (n = 708), treatment retention (n = 557), and non-opioid drug use (n = 368). Clear gaps included a wider array of opioid agonists for treatment, digital behavioral interventions, studies of OUD treatments in criminal justice settings, and overdose as a clinical outcome. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This OUD Evidence Map highlights the importance of pharmacologic interventions for OUD and reductions in opioid use. Future iterations will update results annually and scan policy-level interventions.

OBJECTIVE:Polysubstance use may complicate treatment outcomes for individuals who use opioids. This research aimed to examine the prevalence of polysubstance use in an opioid use disorder treatment trial population and polysubstance use's association with opioid relapse and craving. METHODS:This study is a secondary data analysis of individuals with opioid use disorder who received at least one dose of medication (n = 474) as part of a 24-week, multi-site, open label, randomized Clinical Trials Network study (CTN0051, X:BOT) comparing the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone versus buprenorphine. Models examined pretreatment polysubstance use and polysubstance use during the initial 4 weeks of treatment on outcomes of relapse by week 24 of the treatment trial and opioid craving. RESULTS:Polysubstance use was generally not associated with treatment outcomes of opioid relapse and craving. Proportion of days of pretreatment sedative use was associated with increased likelihood of opioid relapse (OR: 1.01, 95 % CI: 1.00-1.02). Proportion of days of cocaine use during the initial 4 weeks of treatment was associated with increased likelihood of opioid relapse (OR: 1.05, 95 % CI: 1.01-1.09) but this effect was no longer significant once the potential of confounding by opioid use was considered. Sedative use during initial 4 weeks of treatment was associated with increased opioid craving (b: 0.77, 95 % CI: 0.01-1.52). The study found no other significant relationships. CONCLUSIONS:In the current study population, polysubstance use was only marginally associated with 24-week treatment outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Extended-release buprenorphine (XRB) offers a novel approach to sustained monthly treatment for people who use opioids in criminal justice settings (CJS). This study explores the experiences of adults receiving XRB as a jail-to-community treatment. METHODS AND FINDINGS:In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted among adult participants with opioid use disorder (OUD; n  = 16) who were recently released from NYC jails and maintained on XRB after switching from daily sublingual buprenorphine (SLB). Interviews elaborated on the acceptability and barriers and facilitators of XRB treatment pre- and post-release. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for content related to factors influencing XRB treatment uptake and community reentry. Important themes were grouped into systems, medication, and patient-level factors. Key systems-level factors influencing initiation of XRB in jail included an alternative to perceived stigmatization and privacy concerns associated with daily in-jail SLB administration and less concerns with buprenorphine diversion. In-jail peer networks positively influenced participant adoption of XRB. XRB satisfaction was attributed to reduced in-jail clinic and medication administration visits, perceived efficacy and blockade effects upon the use of heroin/fentanyl following release, and averting the risk of criminal activities to fund opioid use. Barriers to retention included post-injection withdrawal symptoms and cravings attributed to perceived suboptimal medication dosing, injection site pain, and lack of in-jail provider information about the medication. CONCLUSION:Participants were generally favorable to XRB initiation in jail and retention post-release. Further studies are needed to address factors influencing access to XRB in criminal justice settings, including stigma, ensuring patient privacy following initiation on XRB, and patient-, provider-, and correctional staff education pertaining to XRB. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identified: NCT03604159.

Background: Community pharmacies offer a population-wide approach to scale opioid overdose prevention programs (OOPP). This qualitative study identified factors influencing implementation of New York State"™s OOPP to inform the uptake of naloxone dispensation in rural and small metro area pharmacies. Methods: In-person interviews were conducted among licensed retail, independent, or supermarket pharmacists (n = 60) in the mid-Hudson valley area of New York in high- and medium-overdose regions. The semi-structured 29-item survey captured attitudes and experiences related to pharmacy participation in naloxone dispensation. Results: Data revealed pharmacist support for naloxone dispensation. Barriers to OOPP success included: (1) Insufficient retail pharmacy leadership support for administrative and clinical tasks for OOPP tasks; (2) excessive opioid analgesic prescribing by physicians; (3) limited uptake of naloxone by prescribers and patients; (4) out-of-pocket costs for patients to obtain naloxone; (5) lack of time, staffing, and space to provide opioid overdose prevention counseling; (6) concern for increased overdose fatalities and injection drug use in the pharmacy premises if pharmacists dispensed sterile syringes, naloxone, and/or Buprenorphine-naloxone; and (7) stigmatizing attitudes toward persons who use opioids. Conclusion: Multi-level intervention efforts that include pharmacist-prescriber communication and training, and stigma-reducing efforts in rural and small metro area regions are needed.