Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Despite the existence of effective pharmacotherapies, rates of opioid use disorder and opioid overdose deaths have continued to increase. Emergency department (ED) visits provide an important opportunity to engage in treatment patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD). Case management implemented in other settings is effective in linking those with opioid and other drug use disorders to longer-term treatment, but research has not established its efficacy in the ED. Here we report the results of a trial of Strengths-Based Case Management (SBCM) for people with untreated OUD who are identified during ED visits, with the primary goal of linking them to pharmacologic treatment. METHODS:The study identified patients with untreated OUD during a treatment episode at a large urban ED. The study randomly assigned three hundred participants in 1:1 ratio to receive SBCM or screening, assessment, and referral (SAR) to OUD treatment. Those assigned to SBCM received up to six sessions of SBCM with the primary goal of linkage to treatment. Primary outcomes were initiation of treatment and engagement in pharmacotherapy for OUD. The study defined a "successful outcome" for opioid use as a 3-month urine negative for illicit opioids and no more than 2 days of self-reported opioid misuse in the 4 weeks prior to the 3-month interview. RESULTS:Rates of treatment initiation were not significantly different in the SBCM and SAR groups (57.4% vs. 49.7%, respectively, p > 0.05), nor did engagement in pharmacotherapy differ significantly between groups (p > 0.05). During the 90 days following the index ED visit, SBCM and SAR participants engaged in pharmacotherapy for a mean of 21.8% (SD = 35.1%) versus 17.7% (SD = 31.0%) of days, respectively. Likewise, no significant difference occurred between groups in rates of "successful opioid use outcome" as defined a priori (p > 0.05), although self-reported opioid use over the entire 6-month follow-up period was lower in the SBCM group (10.8 vs. 13.4 days/month, p = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS:SBCM-ED did not improve OUD treatment initiation and engagement in this ED study. Although these findings do not necessarily generalize to all EDs, other approaches, such as direct referral or initiation of treatment in the ED, have considerable empirical support, and should be implemented where they are feasible.

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Emergency departments (EDs) are increasingly initiating treatment for patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD) and linking them to ongoing addiction care. To our knowledge, patient perspectives related to their ED visit have not been characterized and may influence their access to and interest in OUD treatment. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To assess the experiences and perspectives regarding ED-initiated health care and OUD treatment among US patients with untreated OUD seen in the ED. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:This qualitative study, conducted as part of 2 studies (Project ED Health and ED-CONNECT), included individuals with untreated OUD who were recruited during an ED visit in EDs at 4 urban academic centers, 1 public safety net hospital, and 1 rural critical access hospital in 5 disparate US regions. Focus groups were conducted between June 2018 and January 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Data collection and thematic analysis were grounded in the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) implementation science framework with evidence (perspectives on ED care), context (ED), and facilitation (what is needed to promote change) elements. Results/UNASSIGNED:A total of 31 individuals (mean [SD] age, 43.4 [11.0] years) participated in 6 focus groups. Twenty participants (64.5%) identified as male and most 13 (41.9%) as White; 17 (54.8%) reported being unemployed. Themes related to evidence included patients' experience of stigma and perceived minimization of their pain and medical problems by ED staff. Themes about context included the ED not being seen as a source of OUD treatment initiation and patient readiness to initiate treatment being multifaceted, time sensitive, and related to internal and external patient factors. Themes related to facilitation of improved care of patients with OUD seen in the ED included a need for on-demand treatment and ED staff training. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:In this qualitative study, patients with OUD reported feeling stigmatized and minimized when accessing care in the ED and identified several opportunities to improve care. The findings suggest that strategies to address stigma, acknowledge and treat pain, and provide ED staff training should be implemented to improve ED care for patients with OUD and enhance access to life-saving treatment.

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.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Mobile health (mHealth) tools offer an effective and personalized approach to enhance chronic disease management and may partially offset provider-level barriers to increasing buprenorphine prescribing in primary care. This study assessed the feasibility of integrating a text messaging-based medical management tool (TeMeS) in primary care among patients initiating buprenorphine. Methods/UNASSIGNED:TeMeS messages are categorized per the medical management model, programed in a HIPAA-compliant texting software (Apptoto©), and delivered in a tiered fashion over 8-weeks to patients. This mixed-methods evaluation of TeMeS utilized key stakeholder feedback (patients, physicians, administrators, nursing), text messaging software process measures, thematic analysis of patient participant text message content, and electronic administrative data (eg, appointment adherence, treatment retention) at 2-months. Results/UNASSIGNED:The study team approached 65 patients and n = 14 (21%) were ineligible or declined to participate in the study. Most eligible participants owned a smartphone (90%), responded to at least one text query (88%) over an average of 24 days, and few requested to stop receiving texts (6%). Participant text replies included responses to cognitive behavioral therapy-based queries (13.8%), confirming or rescheduling appointments (6.1%), and insurance, pharmacy, or clinical issues pertaining to buprenorphine dispensation or dosing (2%). Suggestions for design modifications included personalizing message content and adjusting message frequency per patient risk of illicit opioid reuse, use of video-based informational content, and real-time provider and staff support for emergent issues. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Our findings highlight the acceptability, feasibility, and high rates of engagement of utilizing text messaging to enhance self-management among patients initiating buprenorphine treatment.

Chronic pain is highly prevalent among patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). However, little is known about how pharmacological treatments for OUD, for example, extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX), affect pain. To begin addressing this question, we performed a secondary analysis of pain data on a large prospective 24-week, open-label, randomized-controlled comparative effectiveness trial of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX (X:BOT trial). Participants' pain status was measured by the EuroQol (EQ-5D). Based on their responses to the pain question at baseline, participants were dichotomized into "Pain" versus "No Pain" categories. Participant's pain status was evaluated every 4 weeks. A mixed effects longitudinal logistic regression model was fitted to examine the differential effect of XR-NTX versus BUP-NX on pain, modelling pain at all available follow-up assessments, adjusted for age, sex, and baseline pain. A total of 474 individuals who were successfully inducted onto their assigned medications were included in this analysis. Among participants endorsing pain at baseline, substantial reductions in pain were observed over the course of the study in both treatment groups. Howecver reduction in pain was slightly greater in the group treated with XR-NTX than the one treated with BUP-NX (OR = 1.60 [95% CI: 1.07-2.40], P = 0.023). Future research using instruments and design specifically focused on pain could extend the present observations and evaluate their clinical significance.