Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To assess whether chronic pain increases the risk of COVID-19 complications and whether opioid use disorder (OUD) differentiates this risk among New York State Medicaid beneficiaries. DESIGN, SETTING, AND SUBJECTS/METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study of New York State Medicaid claims data. We evaluated Medicaid claims from March 2019 through December 2020 to determine whether chronic pain increased the risk of COVID-19 emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, and complications and whether this relationship differed by OUD status. We included beneficiaries 18-64 years of age with 10 months of prior enrollment. Patients with chronic pain were propensity score-matched to those without chronic pain on demographics, utilization, and comorbidities to control for confounders and were stratified by OUD. Complementary log-log regressions estimated hazard ratios (HRs) of COVID-19 ED visits and hospitalizations; logistic regressions estimated odds ratios (ORs) of hospital complications and readmissions within 0-30, 31-60, and 61-90 days. RESULTS:Among 773 880 adults, chronic pain was associated with greater hazards of COVID-related ED visits (HR = 1.22 [95% CI: 1.16-1.29]) and hospitalizations (HR = 1.19 [95% CI: 1.12-1.27]). Patients with chronic pain and OUD had even greater hazards of hospitalization (HR = 1.25 [95% CI: 1.07-1.47]) and increased odds of hepatic- and cardiac-related events (OR = 1.74 [95% CI: 1.10-2.74]). CONCLUSIONS:Chronic pain increased the risk of COVID-19 ED visits and hospitalizations. Presence of OUD further increased the risk of COVID-19 hospitalizations and the odds of hepatic- and cardiac-related events. Results highlight intersecting risks among a vulnerable population and can inform tailored COVID-19 management.

Researchers across a wide array of disciplines are interested in finding the most influential subjects in a network. In a network setting, intervention effects and health outcomes can spill over from one node to another through network ties, and influential subjects are expected to have a greater impact than others. For this reason, network research in public health has attempted to maximize health and behavioral changes by intervening on a subset of influential subjects. Although influence is often defined only implicitly in most of the literature, the operative notion of influence is inherently causal in many cases: influential subjects are those we should intervene on to achieve the greatest overall effect across the entire network. In this work, we define a causal notion of influence using potential outcomes. We review existing influence measures, such as node centrality, that largely rely on the particular features of the network structure and/or on certain diffusion models that predict the pattern of information or diseases spreads through network ties. We provide simulation studies to demonstrate when popular centrality measures can agree with our causal measure of influence. As an illustrative example, we apply several popular centrality measures to the HIV risk network in the Transmission Reduction Intervention Project and demonstrate the assumptions under which each centrality can represent the causal influence of each participant in the study.

BACKGROUND:The national overdose crisis is often quantified by overdose deaths, but understanding the traumatic impact for those who witness and respond to overdoses can help elucidate mental health needs and opportunities for intervention for this population. Many who respond to overdoses are people who use drugs. This study adds to the literature on how people who use drugs qualitatively experience trauma resulting from witnessing and responding to overdose, through the lens of the Trauma-Informed Theory of Individual Health Behavior. METHODS:We conducted 60-min semi-structured, in-depth phone interviews. Participants were recruited from six states and Washington, DC in March-April 2022. Participants included 17 individuals who witnessed overdose(s) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The interview guide was shaped by theories of trauma. The codebook was developed using a priori codes from the interview guide; inductive codes were added during content analysis. Transcripts were coded using ATLAS.ti. RESULTS:A vast majority reported trauma from witnessing overdoses. Participants reported that the severity of trauma varied by contextual factors such as the closeness of the relationship to the person overdosing or whether the event was their first experience witnessing an overdose. Participants often described symptoms of trauma including rumination, guilt, and hypervigilance. Some reported normalization of witnessing overdoses due to how common overdoses were, while some acknowledged overdoses will never be "normal." The impacts of witnessing overdose on drug use behaviors varied from riskier substance use to increased motivation for treatment and safer drug use practices. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Recognizing the traumatic impact of witnessed overdoses is key to effectively addressing the full range of sequelae of the overdose crisis. Trauma-informed approaches should be central for service providers when they approach this subject with clients, with awareness of how normalization can reduce help-seeking behaviors and the need for psychological aftercare. We found increased motivation for behavior change after witnessing, which presents opportunity for intervention.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Approximately 1800 opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in the US dispense methadone to upwards of 400,000 patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) annually, operating under longstanding highly restrictive guidelines. OTPs were granted novel flexibilities beginning March 15, 2020, allowing for reduced visit frequency and extended take-home doses to minimize COVID exposure with great variation across states and sites. We sought to use electronic health records to compare retention in treatment, opioid use, and adverse events among patients newly entering methadone maintenance in the post-reform period in comparison with year-ago, unexposed, controls. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective observational cohort study across 9 OTPs, geographically dispersed, in the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Clinical Trials Network. Newly enrolled patients between April 15 and October 14, 2020 (post-COVID, reform period) v. March 15-September 14, 2019 (pre-COVID, control period) were assessed. The primary outcome was 6-month retention. Secondary outcomes were opioid use and adverse events including emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and overdose. FINDINGS/UNASSIGNED: INTERPRETATION/UNASSIGNED:Policies allowing for extended take-home schedules were not associated with worse retention or adverse events despite slightly elevated rates of measured opioid use while in care. Relaxed guidelines were not associated with measurable increased harms and findings could inform future studies with prospective trials. FUNDING/UNASSIGNED:USDHHSNIDACTNUG1DA013035-15.

OBJECTIVE:The COVID-19 pandemic contributed to healthcare disruptions for patients with chronic pain. Following initial disruptions, national policies were enacted to expand access to long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain and opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment services, which may have modified risk of opioid overdose. We examined associations between LTOT and/or OUD with fatal and non-fatal opioid overdoses, and whether the pandemic moderated overdose risk in these groups. METHODS:We analyzed New York State Medicaid claims data (3/1/2019-12/31/20) of patients with chronic pain (N = 236,391). We used generalized estimating equations models to assess associations between LTOT and/or OUD (neither LTOT or OUD [ref], LTOT only, OUD only, and LTOT and OUD) and the pandemic (03/2020-12/2020) with opioid overdose. RESULTS:The pandemic did not significantly (ns) affect opioid overdose among patients with LTOT and/or OUD. While patients with LTOT (vs. no LTOT) had a slight increase in opioid overdose during the pandemic (pre-pandemic: aOR:1.65, 95% CI:1.05, 2.57; pandemic: aOR:2.43, CI:1.75,3.37, ns), patients with OUD had a slightly attenuated odds of overdose during the pandemic (pre-pandemic: aOR:5.65, CI:4.73, 6.75; pandemic: aOR:5.16, CI:4.33, 6.14, ns). Patients with both LTOT and OUD also experienced a slightly reduced odds of opioid overdose during the pandemic (pre-pandemic: aOR:5.82, CI:3.58, 9.44; pandemic: aOR:3.70, CI:2.11, 6.50, ns). CONCLUSIONS:Findings demonstrated no significant effect of the pandemic on opioid overdose among people with chronic pain and LTOT and/or OUD, suggesting pandemic policies expanding access to chronic pain and OUD treatment services may have mitigated the risk of opioid overdose.

BACKGROUND:Chronic pain has been extensively explored as a risk factor for opioid misuse, resulting in increased focus on opioid prescribing practices for individuals with such conditions. Physical disability sometimes co-occurs with chronic pain but may also represent an independent risk factor for opioid misuse. However, previous research has not disentangled whether disability contributes to risk independent of chronic pain. METHODS:Here, we estimate the independent and joint adjusted associations between having a physical disability and co-occurring chronic pain condition at time of Medicaid enrollment on subsequent 18-month risk of incident opioid use disorder (OUD) and non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose among non-elderly, adult Medicaid beneficiaries (2016-2019). RESULTS:We find robust evidence that having a physical disability approximately doubles the risk of incident OUD or opioid overdose, and physical disability co-occurring with chronic pain increases the risks approximately sixfold as compared to having neither chronic pain nor disability. In absolute numbers, those with neither a physical disability nor chronic pain condition have a 1.8% adjusted risk of incident OUD over 18 months of follow-up, those with physical disability alone have an 2.9% incident risk, those with chronic pain alone have a 3.6% incident risk, and those with co-occurring physical disability and chronic pain have a 11.1% incident risk. CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest that those with a physical disability should receive increased attention from the medical and healthcare communities to reduce their risk of opioid misuse and attendant negative outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Acute-care interventions that identify patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), initiate treatment, and link patients to community-based services, have proliferated in recent years. Yet, much is unknown about the specific strategies being used to support continuity of care from emergency department (ED) or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD treatment. In this scoping review, we synthesize the existing literature on patient transition interventions, and form an initial typology of reported strategies. METHODS:We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO for peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2021 that studied interventions linking patients with SUD from ED or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD services. Eligible articles measured at least one post-discharge treatment outcome and included a description of the strategy used to promote linkage to community care. Detailed information was extracted on the components of the transition strategies and a thematic coding process was used to categorize strategies into a typology based on shared characteristics. Facilitators and barriers to transitions of care were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS:Forty-five articles met inclusion criteria. 62% included ED interventions and 44% inpatient interventions. The majority focused on patients with opioid (71%) or alcohol (31%) use disorder. The transition strategies reported across studies were heterogeneous and often not well described. An initial typology of ten transition strategies, including five pre- and five post-discharge transition strategies is proposed. The most common strategy was scheduling an appointment with a community-based treatment provider prior to discharge. A range of facilitators and barriers were described, which can inform efforts to improve hospital-to-community transitions of care. CONCLUSIONS:Strategies to support transitions from acute-care to community-based SUD services, although critical for ensuring continuity of care, vary greatly across interventions and are inconsistently measured and described. More research is needed to classify SUD care transition strategies, understand their components, and explore which lead to the best patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Identifying community characteristics associated with firearm assault could facilitate prevention. We investigated the effect of community firearm dealer and alcohol outlet densities on individual risk of firearm assault injury. METHODS:In this density-sampled case-control study of Californians, January 2005-September 2015, cases comprised all residents with a fatal or nonfatal firearm assault injury. For each month, we sampled controls from the state population in a 4:1 ratio with cases. Exposures were monthly densities of county-level pawn and nonpawn firearm dealers and ZIP code-level off-premises alcohol outlets and bars and pubs ("bars/pubs"). We used case-control-weighted G-computation to estimate risk differences (RD) statewide and among younger Black men, comparing observed exposure densities to hypothetical interventions setting these densities to low. We estimated additive interactions between firearm and alcohol retailer density. Secondary analyses examined interventions targeted to high exposure density or outcome burden areas. RESULTS:There were 67,850 cases and 268,122 controls. Observed (vs. low) densities of pawn firearm dealers and off-premises alcohol outlets were individually associated with elevated monthly risk of firearm assault per 100,000 people (RD pawn dealers : 0.06, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.08; RD off-premises outlets : 0.01, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.03), but nonpawn firearm dealer and bar/pub density were not; models targeting only areas with the highest outcome burden were similar. Among younger Black men, estimates were larger. There was no interaction between firearm and alcohol retailer density. CONCLUSIONS:Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that limiting pawn firearm dealers and off-premises alcohol outlet densities can reduce interpersonal firearm violence.

BACKGROUND:Cannabis use disorder is associated with considerable comorbidity and impairment in functioning, and prevalence is increasing among adults with chronic pain. We aimed to assess the effect of introduction of medical cannabis laws (MCL) and recreational cannabis laws (RCL) on the increase in cannabis use disorder among patients in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA). METHODS:Data from patients with one or more primary care, emergency, or mental health visit to the VHA in 2005-19 were analysed using 15 repeated cross-sectional VHA electronic health record datasets (ie, one dataset per year). Patients in hospice or palliative care were excluded. Patients were stratified as having chronic pain or not using an American Pain Society taxonomy of painful medical conditions. We used staggered-adoption difference-in-difference analyses to estimate the role of MCL and RCL enactment in the increases in prevalence of diagnosed cannabis use disorder and associations with presence of chronic pain, accounting for the year that state laws were enacted. We did this by fitting a linear binomial regression model stratified by pain, with time-varying cannabis law status, fixed effects for state, categorical year, time-varying state-level sociodemographic covariates, and patient covariates (age group [18-34 years, 35-64 years, and 65-75 years], sex, and race and ethnicity). FINDINGS:Between 2005 and 2019, 3 234 382-4 579 994 patients were included per year. Among patients without pain in 2005, 5·1% were female, mean age was 58·3 (SD 12·6) years, and 75·7%, 15·6%, and 3·6% were White, Black, and Hispanic or Latino, respectively. In 2019, 9·3% were female, mean age was 56·7 (SD 15·2) years, and 68·1%, 18·2%, and 6·5% were White, Black, and Hispanic or Latino, respectively. Among patients with pain in 2005, 7·1% were female, mean age was 57·2 (SD 11·4) years, and 74·0%, 17·8%, and 3·9% were White, Black, and Hispanic or Latino, respectively. In 2019, 12·4% were female, mean age was 57·2 (SD 13·8) years, and 65·3%, 21·9%, and 7·0% were White, Black, and Hispanic or Latino, respectively. Among patients with chronic pain, enacting MCL led to a 0·135% (95% CI 0·118-0·153) absolute increase in cannabis use disorder prevalence, with 8·4% of the total increase in MCL-enacting states attributable to MCL. Enacting RCL led to a 0·188% (0·160-0·217) absolute increase in cannabis use disorder prevalence, with 11·5% of the total increase in RCL-enacting states attributable to RCL. In patients without chronic pain, enacting MCL and RCL led to smaller absolute increases in cannabis use disorder prevalence (MCL: 0·037% [0·027-0·048], 5·7% attributable to MCL; RCL: 0·042% [0·023-0·060], 6·0% attributable to RCL). Overall, associations of MCL and RCL with cannabis use disorder were greater in patients with chronic pain than in patients without chronic pain. INTERPRETATION:Increasing cannabis use disorder prevalence among patients with chronic pain following state legalisation is a public health concern, especially among older age groups. Given cannabis commercialisation and widespread public beliefs about its efficacy, clinical monitoring of cannabis use and discussion of the risk of cannabis use disorder among patients with chronic pain is warranted. FUNDING:NIDA grant R01DA048860, New York State Psychiatric Institute, and the VA Centers of Excellence in Substance Addiction Treatment and Education.

OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to examine trends in cannabis-positive urine drug screens (UDSs) among emergency department (ED) patients from 2008 to 2019 using data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) health care system, and whether these trends differed by age group (18-34, 35-64, and 65-75 years), sex, and race, and ethnicity. METHOD:VHA electronic health records from 2008 to 2019 were used to identify the percentage of unique VHA patients seen each year at an ED, received a UDS, and screened positive for cannabis. Trends in cannabis-positive UDS were examined by age, race and ethnicity, and sex within age groups. RESULTS:Of the VHA ED patients with a UDS, the annual prevalence positive for cannabis increased from 16.42% in 2008 to 27.2% in 2019. The largest increases in cannabis-positive UDS were observed in the younger age groups. Male and female ED patients tested positive for cannabis at similar levels. Although the prevalence of cannabis-positive UDS was consistently highest among non-Hispanic Black patients, cannabis-positive UDS increased in all race and ethnicity groups. DISCUSSION:The increasing prevalence of cannabis-positive UDS supports the validity of previously observed population-level increases in cannabis use and cannabis use disorder from survey and administrative records. Time trends via UDS results provide additional support that previously documented increases in self-reported cannabis use and disorder from surveys and claims data are not spuriously due to changes in patient willingness to report use as it becomes more legalized, or due to greater clinical attention over time.