Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Both local socio-economic conditions and prescription opioid supply are associated with drug overdose deaths, which exhibit substantial geographical heterogeneity across the United States. We measured whether the associations of prescription opioid supply with drug overdose deaths vary by local socio-economic conditions. DESIGN:Ecological county-level study, including 3109 US counties between 2006 and 2019 (n = 43 526 county-years) using annual mortality data. SETTING:United States. CASES:A total of 711 447 drug overdose deaths. MEASUREMENTS:We modeled overdose counts using Bayesian hierarchical Poisson models, estimating associations between four types of drug overdose deaths (deaths involving any drugs, any opioid, prescription opioids only and heroin), prescription opioid supply and five socio-economic indicators: unemployment, poverty rate, income inequality, Rey index (components include mean household income, % high school graduates, % blue-collar workers and unemployment rate), and American human development index (HDI; an indicator of community wellbeing). FINDINGS:Drug overdose deaths and all substance-specific overdose deaths were higher in counties with higher income inequality [adjusted odds ratios (aORs) = 1.09-1.13], Rey index (aORs = 1.15-1.21) and prescription opioid supply (aORs = 1.14-1.21), and lower in counties with higher HDI scores (aORs = 0.75-0.92). Poverty rate, income inequality and HDI scores were found to modify the effect of prescription opioid supply on heroin overdose deaths. The plot of the interactions showed that when disadvantage is high, increasing prescription opioid supply does not increase heroin overdose deaths. The less disadvantage there is, indicated by lower poverty rates, higher HDI scores and lower income inequality, the greater the effect of increasing prescription opioid supply relative to population size on heroin overdose deaths in US counties. CONCLUSIONS:In the United States, prescription opioid supply is associated with higher drug overdose deaths; associations are stronger in counties with less disadvantage and less income inequality, but only for heroin overdose deaths.

PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:We aimed to synthesize insights from systems science approaches applied to domestic and gender-based violence. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We conducted a systematic review of systems science studies (systems thinking, group model-building, agent-based modeling [ABM], system dynamics [SD] modeling, social network analysis [SNA], and network analysis [NA]) applied to domestic or gender-based violence, including victimization, perpetration, prevention, and community responses. We used blinded review to identify papers meeting our inclusion criteria (i.e., peer-reviewed journal article or published book chapter that described a systems science approach to domestic or gender-based violence, broadly defined) and assessed the quality and transparency of each study. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Our search yielded 1,841 studies, and 74 studies met our inclusion criteria (45 SNA, 12 NA, 8 ABM, and 3 SD). Although research aims varied across study types, the included studies highlighted social network influences on risks for domestic violence, clustering of risk factors and violence experiences, and potential targets for intervention. We assessed the quality of the included studies as moderate, though only a minority adhered to best practices in model development and dissemination, including stakeholder engagement and sharing of model code. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Systems science approaches for the study of domestic and gender-based violence have shed light on the complex processes that characterize domestic violence and its broader context. Future research in this area should include greater dialogue between different types of systems science approaches, consideration of peer and family influences in the same models, and expanded use of best practices, including continued engagement of community stakeholders. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION/UNASSIGNED:The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10896-023-00578-8.

BACKGROUND:Cannabis legalization for medical and recreational purposes has been suggested as an effective strategy to reduce opioid and benzodiazepine use and deaths. We examined the county-level association between medical and recreational cannabis laws and poisoning deaths involving opioids and benzodiazepines in the US from 2002 to 2020. METHODS:Our ecologic county-level, spatiotemporal study comprised 49 states. Exposures were state-level implementation of medical and recreational cannabis laws and state-level initiation of cannabis dispensary sales. Our main outcomes were poisoning deaths involving any opioid, any benzodiazepine, and opioids with benzodiazepines. Secondary analyses included overdoses involving natural and semi-synthetic opioids, synthetic opioids, and heroin. RESULTS:Implementation of medical cannabis laws was associated with increased deaths involving opioids (rate ratio [RR] = 1.14; 95% credible interval [CrI] = 1.11, 1.18), benzodiazepines (RR = 1.19; 95% CrI = 1.12, 1.26), and opioids+benzodiazepines (RR = 1.22; 95% CrI = 1.15, 1.30). Medical cannabis legalizations allowing dispensaries was associated with fewer deaths involving opioids (RR = 0.88; 95% CrI = 0.85, 0.91) but not benzodiazepine deaths; results for recreational cannabis implementation and opioid deaths were similar (RR = 0.81; 95% CrI = 0.75, 0.88). Recreational cannabis laws allowing dispensary sales was associated with consistent reductions in opioid- (RR = 0.83; 95% CrI = 0.76, 0.91), benzodiazepine- (RR = 0.79; 95% CrI = 0.68, 0.92), and opioid+benzodiazepine-related poisonings (RR = 0.83; 95% CrI = 0.70, 0.98). CONCLUSIONS:Implementation of medical cannabis laws was associated with higher rates of opioid- and benzodiazepine-related deaths, whereas laws permitting broader cannabis access, including implementation of recreational cannabis laws and medical and recreational dispensaries, were associated with lower rates. The estimated effects of the expanded availability of cannabis seem dependent on the type of law implemented and its provisions.

Trauma, violence, and their consequences for population health are shaped by complex, intersecting forces across the life span. We aimed to illustrate the strengths of agent-based modeling (ABM), a computational approach in which population-level patterns emerge from the behaviors and interactions of simulated individuals, for advancing trauma research; Method: We provide an overview of agent-based modeling for trauma research, including a discussion of the model development process, ABM as a complement to other causal inference and complex systems approaches in trauma research, and past ABM applications in the trauma literature; Results: We use existing ABM applications to illustrate the strengths of ABM for trauma research, including incorporating interactions between individuals, simulating processes across multiple scales, examining life-course effects, testing alternate theories, comparing intervention strategies in a virtual laboratory, and guiding decision making. We also discuss the challenges of applying ABM to trauma research and offer specific suggestions for incorporating ABM into future studies of trauma and violence; Conclusion: Agent-based modeling is a useful complement to other methodological advances in trauma research. We recommend a more widespread adoption of ABM, particularly for research into patterns and consequences of individual traumatic experiences across the life course and understanding the effects of interventions that may be influenced by social norms and social network structures. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

IMPORTANCE:Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is increasing among US adults. Few national studies have addressed the role of medical cannabis laws (MCLs) and recreational cannabis laws (RCLs) in these increases, particularly in patient populations with high rates of CUD risk factors. OBJECTIVE:To quantify the role of MCL and RCL enactment in the increases in diagnosed CUD prevalence among Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients from 2005 to 2019. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Staggered-adoption difference-in-difference analyses were used to estimate the role of MCL and RCL in the increases in prevalence of CUD diagnoses, fitting a linear binomial regression model with fixed effects for state, categorical year, time-varying cannabis law status, state-level sociodemographic covariates, and patient age group, sex, and race and ethnicity. Patients aged 18 to 75 years with 1 or more VHA primary care, emergency department, or mental health visit and no hospice/palliative care within a given calendar year were included. Time-varying yearly state control covariates were state/year rates from American Community Survey data: percentage male, Black, Hispanic, White, 18 years or older, unemployed, income below poverty threshold, and yearly median household income. Analysis took place between February to December 2022. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:As preplanned, International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification, ninth and tenth revisions, CUD diagnoses from electronic health records were analyzed. RESULTS:The number of individuals analyzed ranged from 3 234 382 in 2005 to 4 579 994 in 2019. Patients were largely male (94.1% in 2005 and 89.0% in 2019) and White (75.0% in 2005 and 66.6% in 2019), with a mean (SD) age of 57.0 [14.4] years. From 2005 to 2019, adjusted CUD prevalences increased from 1.38% to 2.25% in states with no cannabis laws (no CLs), 1.38% to 2.54% in MCL-only enacting states, and 1.39% to 2.56% in RCL-enacting states. Difference-in-difference results indicated that MCL-only enactment was associated with a 0.05% (0.05-0.06) absolute increase in CUD prevalence, ie, that 4.7% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in MCL-only enacting states could be attributed to MCLs, while RCL enactment was associated with a 1.12% (95% CI, 0.10-0.13) absolute increase in CUD prevalence, ie, that 9.8% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in RCL-enacting states could be attributed to RCLs. The role of RCL in the increases in CUD prevalence was greatest in patients aged 65 to 75 years, with an absolute increase of 0.15% (95% CI, 0.13-0.17) in CUD prevalence associated with RCLs, ie, 18.6% of the total increase in CUD prevalence in that age group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:In this study of VHA patients, MCL and RCL enactment played a significant role in the overall increases in CUD prevalence, particularly in older patients. However, consistent with general population studies, effect sizes were relatively small, suggesting that cumulatively, laws affected cannabis attitudes diffusely across the country or that other factors played a larger role in the overall increases in adult CUD. Results underscore the need to screen for cannabis use and CUD and to treat CUD when it is present.

Prior applications of machine learning to population health have relied on conventional model assessment criteria, limiting the utility of models as decision supports for public health practitioners. To facilitate practitioner use of machine learning as decision support for area-level intervention, this study developed and applied four practice-based predictive model evaluation criteria (implementation capacity, preventive potential, health equity, and jurisdictional practicalities). We used a case study of overdose prevention in Rhode Island to illustrate how these criteria could inform public health practice and health equity promotion. We used Rhode Island overdose mortality records from January 2016 to June 2020 (N=1,408) and neighborhood-level Census data. We learned two disparate machine learning models, Gaussian process and random forest, to illustrate the comparative utility of our criteria to guide interventions. Our models predicted 7.5-36.4% of overdose deaths during the test period, illustrating the preventive potential of overdose interventions assuming 5-20% statewide implementation capacities for neighborhood-level resource deployment. We described the health equity implications of predictive modeling to guide interventions along urbanicity, racial/ethnic composition, and poverty. In sum, our study discussed considerations to complement predictive model evaluation criteria and inform the prevention and mitigation of spatially dynamic public health problems across the breadth of practice.

Substance use disorders (SUD) are associated with increased risk of worse COVID-19 outcomes. Likewise, racial/ethnic minority patients experience greater risk of severe COVID-19 disease compared to white patients. Providers should understand the role of race and ethnicity as an effect modifier on COVID-19 severity among individuals with SUD. This retrospective cohort study assessed patient race/ethnicity as an effect modifier of the risk of severe COVID-19 disease among patients with histories of SUD and overdose. We used merged electronic health record data from 116,471 adult patients with a COVID-19 encounter between March 2020 and February 2021 across five healthcare systems in New York City. Exposures were patient histories of SUD and overdose. Outcomes were risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and subsequent COVID-19-related ventilation, acute kidney failure, sepsis, and mortality. Risk factors included patient age, sex, and race/ethnicity, as well as medical comorbidities associated with COVID-19 severity. We tested for interaction between SUD and patient race/ethnicity on COVID-19 outcomes. Findings showed that Non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients experienced a higher prevalence of all adverse COVID-19 outcomes compared to non-Hispanic white patients. Past-year alcohol (OR 1.24 [1.01-1.53]) and opioid use disorders (OR 1.91 [1.46-2.49]), as well as overdose history (OR 4.45 [3.62-5.46]), were predictive of COVID-19 mortality, as well as other adverse COVID-19 outcomes. Among patients with SUD, significant differences in outcome risk were detected between patients of different race/ethnicity groups. Findings indicate that providers should consider multiple dimensions of vulnerability to adequately manage COVID-19 disease among populations with SUDs.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The overdose crisis continues to be a major public health emergency in the United States. While effective medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), such as buprenorphine, have ample scientific evidence to their effectiveness, they are underutilized in the United States and particularly in criminal justice settings. One rationale against the expansion of MOUD in carceral settings cited by jail, prison, and even Drug Enforcement Administration leaders is the potential for diversion of these medications. However, currently little data exist to support this claim. Instead, successful examples from early expansion states could help to change attitudes and calm misconceptions around diversion fears. RESULTS:In this commentary, we discuss the experience of one county jail that successfully expanded buprenorphine treatment and did not suffer significant impacts related to diversion. Instead, the jail found that their holistic and compassionate approach to buprenorphine treatment improved conditions both for incarcerated individuals and jail staff. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Amid a changing policy landscape and a federal commitment to increase access to effective treatments in criminal justice settings, lessons can be learned from jails and prisons that have already or are working toward expansion of MOUD in their facilities. Ideally, these anecdotal examples, in addition to data, will help to encourage more facilities to incorporate buprenorphine into their opioid use disorder treatment strategies.

The association between recent release from incarceration and dramatically increased risk of fatal overdose is well-established at the individual level. Fatal overdose and. arrest/release are spatially clustered, suggesting that this association may persist at the neighborhood level. We analyzed multicomponent data from Rhode Island, 2016-2020, and observed a modest association at the census tract level between rates of release per 1000 population and fatal overdose per 100,000 person-years, adjusting for spatial autocorrelation in both the exposure and outcome. Our results suggest that for each additional person released to a given census tract per 1000 population, there is a corresponding increase in the rate of fatal overdose by 2 per 100,000 person years. This association is more pronounced in suburban tracts, where each additional release awaiting trial is associated with an increase in the rate of fatal overdose of 4 per 100,000 person-years and 6 per 100,000 person-years for each additional release following sentence expiration. This association is not modified by the presence or absence of a licensed medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment provider in the same or surrounding tracts. Our results suggest that neighborhood-level release rates are moderately informative as to tract-level rates of fatal overdose and underscore the importance of expanding pre-release MOUD access in correctional settings. Future research should explore risk and resource environments particularly in suburban and rural areas and their impacts on overdose risk among individuals returning to the community.