Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Overdose rates in the U.S. rose dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic. Well-documented racial and sociodemographic inequities in the impact of the pandemic suggest the potential for similar inequities for overdose. Our objective was to identify subgroups of New York State Medicaid enrollees who experienced the greatest increases in non-fatal opioid overdose risk following onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS:Data are from a retrospective cohort of 1,021,889 people enrolled in New York State Medicaid from 2019-2020. To identify subgroups with the greatest increased risk of non-fatal overdose following onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we used Heterogeneous Treatment Effect (HTE)-Scan, a novel machine learning method developed for accurate and computationally efficient discovery of heterogeneous treatment effects in complex data. RESULTS:In the total sample, risk of non-fatal opioid overdose increased 22% after onset of the pandemic. We also identified two subgroups with elevated risk relative to the total sample: subgroup 1 (Black and Hispanic males aged 45-64 years old with no baseline documentation of opioid use disorder (OUD); N = 53,065) and subgroup 2 (people aged 45-64 years old with documented aged/blind/disabled status and no baseline documentation of OUD; N = 73,694). These subgroups experienced a 54% and 57% increase in non-fatal overdose risk, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:We estimated heterogeneous effects of onset of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-fatal overdose, with elevated risks estimated for older working-aged, structurally disadvantaged adults without documented OUD. These findings illustrate the importance of structural factors in driving heterogeneous risk of overdose following complex social events.

HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effective prevention strategy, yet awareness, knowledge, and willingness to use it among people who inject drugs (PWID) remains inadequate despite widespread eligibility. Stigma, particularly HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes, may be a key barrier to engagement at early stages of the PrEP care continuum. We examine how HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes affect PrEP awareness, knowledge, and willingness among PWID. We surveyed 262 HIV-negative PWID in Los Angeles and Denver (2021-2023) and used structural equation modeling to examine associations between HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes (11-item validated scale with α = 0.899 and 1-factor structure) and three early PrEP outcomes: awareness, knowledge, and willingness, while controlling for race/ethnicity, gender, housing status, and conducted sub-analyses on willingness to use long-acting injectable PrEP. HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes were significantly associated with lower PrEP awareness (β - 0.212, p < 0.001) and less accurate knowledge (β - 0.179, p = 0.006). Accurate knowledge was associated with greater willingness to use PrEP (β 0.175, p = 0.027). Black, Indigenous, and Other Persons of Color (BIPOC) participants reported higher HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes than non-Hispanic White participants (β 0.196, p = 0.003). Over half (56%) of participants were willing to take daily oral PrEP once informed, and many were interested in long-acting injectable PrEP. HIV-stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes are associated with lower PrEP care continuum engagement among PWID, particularly through limiting awareness and understanding of PrEP. BIPOC participants reported higher levels of stigmatizing attitudes, suggesting that broader structural and intersectional stigma may shape PrEP engagement, consistent with prior research. Interventions to increase PrEP uptake should address both individual- and structural-level stigma and consider leveraging peer networks and community supports to foster resilience and improve equitable access to HIV prevention tools.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The criminal legal system (CLS) is the most common treatment referral source for adolescent cannabis-related problems. Understanding trends in racial/ethnic disparities of CLS-referred treatment could help identify groups in need of additional supports. METHODS:This observational study used repeated cross-sectional data from the Treatment Episode Dataset-Admissions 2010-2022 and Census population denominators to calculate annual specialty CLS-referred cannabis-related treatment admission rates per 10,000 adolescents ages 12-17 by race and ethnicity. Joinpoint models examined trends in CLS-referred treatment rates by race and ethnicity, and group differences in the percent of cannabis admissions referred through the CLS were described. RESULTS:Adolescent cannabis CLS-referred treatment rates decreased overall by 81.6% from 2010 (16.93/10,000) to 2022 (3.11/10,000). Joinpoint models identified different turning points when significant reductions started by race and ethnicity. Compared to non-Hispanic White adolescents across all years, CLS-referred treatment admission rates were higher for American Indian/Alaska Native non-Hispanic adolescents (rate difference [RD]=19.53 95% CI=7.91-31.15) and Black non-Hispanic adolescents (RD=10.14, 95% CI=0.19, 20.08), but not other groups. American Indian/Alaska Native and Black adolescents had higher CLS-referred treatment than white adolescents in 2010 in both absolute and relative terms; differences with wider confidence intervals in 2022 were no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS:CLS-referred cannabis-related treatment admissions decreased substantially across groups over time. High CLS-referral rates among American Indian/Alaska Native and Black non-Hispanic adolescents highlight the importance of distinguishing heterogeneous racial/ethnic groups. Targeted structural interventions are needed to increase non-CLS-related referrals and address cannabis-related treatment gaps in a changing cannabis policy environment.

Overdose prevention centers (OPCs) are associated with improved community health and decreased crime, but opponents argue that OPCs depress nearby property values. We estimated the association of the opening of the first two public recognized OPC in the United States with neighborhood residential rents and real estate sales in the East Harlem and Washington Heights neighborhoods of New York City (NYC). Using augmented synthetic controls, we analyzed quarterly and semiannual rental listings and annual and semiannual sales within 300- and 500-meter buffers around the OPCs. Donor units were buffers around syringe service programs without OPCs and opioid treatment programs. Primary outcomes were median quarterly rental listing price and median annual sales price. Overall, we found no changes in neighborhood rental or sales prices. For quarterly rentals at 300 m, we estimated (ATT, 95% CI) $145 (-$780, $1070) in East Harlem and -$505 (-$1279, $269) in Washington Heights. For annual sales at 500 m, we estimated -$542 993 (-$1 228 024, $142038) in East Harlem and $1 121 706 (-$431 285, $2674697) in Washington Heights. Conformal inference identified no detectable time-point effects. Overall, OPC implementation in NYC was not associated with changes in rents or sales, suggesting these facilities may not generate appreciable effects on local housing values.

Stigma in healthcare settings is a critical barrier to HIV prevention and treatment among people who inject drugs (PWID). While previous tools have measured anticipated stigma, few account for the intersectional and provider-specific experiences of PWID-particularly from syringe service programs (SSPs). We developed and validated the Substance Use Anticipated Provider Stigma Scale (SU-APSS), a multidimensional instrument assessing anticipated stigma from four provider types: healthcare workers, substance use treatment staff, pharmacists, and SSP personnel. Data were drawn from a cross-sectional survey of 264 PWID who were 18 or older, HIV-negative, had injected drugs and used opioids within the past 30 days, and showed visible signs of recent injection. We conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on responses from 218 participants to evaluate structural validity and used Cronbach's alpha to assess internal consistency. The CFA supported a four-factor structure with strong model fit indices (CFI = 0.97, RMSEA = 0.09 [0.07, 0.11], SRMR = 0.04). All items significantly loaded onto their respective factors (loadings: 0.62-1.06). Internal consistency was high across all subscales (α = 0.85-0.96) and for the overall scale (α = 0.87). Attribution analysis revealed drug use, physical appearance, and income level as the most common perceived reasons for anticipated stigma. The SU-APSS offers a practical tool for identifying provider-specific stigma, informing stigma-reduction interventions, and evaluating implementation strategies to improve HIV prevention and care engagement among PWID.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:The opioid crisis is still a public health emergency in the United States, despite recent declines in opioid overdose deaths (OODs) and increased availability of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for opioid use disorder (OUD). The geographic variability in OODs drives the need for localized decision-making, where interventions are tailored to the unique needs of communities. This study aimed to develop and calibrate a simulation model that evaluates the impact of enhanced implementation of EBP on OODs at the community-level. DESIGN/METHODS:We developed OPSiM (Opioid Policy Simulation Model), a community-level microsimulation model that simulates the course of opioid use, OUD, treatment, recovery and overdose-related events. The model was parameterized with data from the HEALing Communities Study and looked at six scenarios of EBPs implemented in 2025 with sustainment through 2030: (1) maintain 2024 EBP levels (status quo); (2) increase initiation of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD); (3) increase MOUD retention; (4) increase MOUD initiation and retention; (5) increase distribution of naloxone; and (6) both scenarios 4 and 5. SETTING/METHODS:Twenty-nine communities in Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio, USA. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Simulated community residents with non-prescribed opioid use or OUD. MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:Estimated number of OODs per 100 000 individuals between 2025 and 2030 in each community, averaged across the 26 communities. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Under the status quo, the model projected 158 OODs (range across communities: 39-468) per 100 000 individuals between 2025 and 2030. Increasing medications for the treatment of OUD (MOUD) retention alone reduced OODs by 6% (range: 3-15%), while increasing MOUD initiation alone reduced OODs by 9% (range: 8-12%). Increasing both MOUD initiation and retention had a synergistic effect, reducing OODs by 21% (range: 15-31%). Reduction in OODs in response to increased MOUD initiation and/or retention was similar across urban and rural communities. The effect of increasing naloxone distribution varied substantially across communities due to differing saturation levels; in some communities, additional naloxone kits provided only marginal benefits. Rural communities were further from saturation whereas most urban communities were at or close to saturation. CONCLUSIONS:A tailored, multi-pronged approach that scales up medications for opioid use disorder alongside widespread naloxone distribution, and that addresses community-specific needs and capacities, will be most effective at reducing opioid overdose deaths in the United States.

BACKGROUND:Between 2022 and 2023, overdose mortality decreased among non-Hispanic (NH) white people but stayed the same or increased among people of colour in the USA. County racialised economic segregation may contribute to overdose mortality. METHODS:measures, one for higher-income NH white and lower-income black residents and another for higher-income NH white and lower-income Hispanic residents. Models included random effects for county, year and county-year interaction, and fixed effects for proportion male, proportion aged 25-44, land area, state and year. We estimated relative risk (RR) by quintile (least vs most privileged) and the difference in overdose mortality per 100 000 (RD) had all counties shifted to the risk of the most advantaged counties (Q5). RESULTS:Counties with the highest proportion of lower-income racially minoritised residents (Q1) had an increased RR of overdose deaths compared with Q5 counties, both overall (aRRs 1.64 (1.51-1.78); 1.40 (1.29-1.52)), and among subgroups. Had all counties experienced the risk of Q5 counties, we estimated an average reduction in overdose deaths overall (RDs per 100 000: -7.20 (-8.25 to -6.10); -6.37 (-7.38 to -5.25)) and among subgroups. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:County racialised economic segregation was associated with overdose mortality risk in 2018-2022. Investment in evidence-based strategies to reduce overdose risk in places experiencing harms related to racialised economic segregation is critical.

BACKGROUND:Methadone is a highly effective, strictly regulated medication to treat opioid use disorder. COVID-19 flexibilities allowed for up to 28 days of take-homes versus daily travel to clinics for observed dosing, but receiving take-homes differed widely across clinics and individuals. We examined the relationship between state take-home policies and social vulnerability on take-home methadone receipt and days' supply. METHODS:Data were from the VOICES study, a telephone survey conducted between 1/2023-8/2024 of people who use drugs from Wisconsin, Michigan, New Mexico, and New Jersey. We estimated average marginal effects of state methadone policy (flexibility-adoption vs non-adoption) on methadone take-home receipt and days' supply. Models were fully adjusted for individual sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS:Most participants were recruited from flexibility-adoption states (n = 285/428, 67%). Over half received take-home methadone (65%; average 3.1 days' supply, SD 6.2); 19% of take-home recipients (n = 54) received ≥3 days' supply. Take-home receipt was higher for participants in flexibility-adoption states (AME 0.52, p < 0.0001). Receiving ≥3 days' supply was lower in people reporting unemployment (vs. employment, AME -0.23, p = 0.0032) and past 30-day drug use (vs. no drug use, AME -0.23, p = 0.0014). CONCLUSIONS:State take-home policy was most strongly associated with take-home methadone receipt. Receiving longer days of take-home supplies remains rare. Take-home eligibility guidelines should be established and consider potential social vulnerability factors to daily on-site dosing.