Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES:To compare the characteristics of individual overdose decedents in Rhode Island, 2016-2020 to the neighborhoods where fatal overdoses occurred over the same time period. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective analysis of fatal overdoses occurring between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2020. Using individual- and neighborhood-level data, we conducted descriptive analyses to explore the characteristics of individuals and neighborhoods most affected by overdose. RESULTS:Most overdose decedents during the study period were non-Hispanic White. Across increasingly more White and non-Hispanic neighborhoods, rates of fatal overdose per 100,000 person-years decreased. An opposite pattern was observed across quintiles of average neighborhood poverty. CONCLUSIONS:Rates of fatal overdose were higher in less White, more Hispanic, and poorer neighborhoods, suggesting modest divergence between the characteristics of individuals and the neighborhoods most severely affected. These impacts may not be uniform across space and may accrue differentially to more disadvantaged and racially/ethnically diverse neighborhoods.

BACKGROUND:In the context of changing cannabis and other drug policy and regulation, concerns may arise regarding drug treatment access and use. We assessed cannabis/cocaine-related dependence and treatment in Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay. METHODS:Nationally representative cross-sectional household surveys of people ages 15-64 in Argentina (4 surveys, 2006-2017), Chile (7 surveys, 2006-2018), and Uruguay (4 surveys, 2006-2018) were harmonized. We estimated weighted prevalences of cannabis or cocaine-related (cocaine or cocaine paste) dependence, based on meeting 3+ past-year ICD-10 dependence criteria. We estimated weighted prevalences of past-year alcohol/drug treatment use (Argentina, Chile) or use/seeking (Uruguay) among people with past-year cannabis/cocaine-related dependence. We tested model-based prevalence trends over time and described individual-level treatment correlates by country. RESULTS:Cannabis/cocaine dependence prevalence increased in the region starting in 2010-2011, driven by cannabis dependence. Adjusted cannabis dependence prevalence increased from 0.7% in 2010 to 1.5% in 2017 in Argentina (aPD=0.8, 95% CI= 0.3, 1.2), from 0.8% in 2010 to 2.8% in 2018 in Chile (aPD=2.0, 95% CI= 1.4, 2.6), and from 1.4% in 2011 to 2.4% in 2018 in Uruguay (aPD=0.9, 95% CI= 0.2, 1.6). Cocaine-related dependence increased in Uruguay, decreased in Argentina, and remained stable in Chile. Among people with past-year cannabis/cocaine dependence, average alcohol/drug treatment use prevalence was 15.3% in Argentina and 6.0% in Chile, while treatment use/seeking was 14.7% in Uruguay. Alcohol/drug treatment prevalence was lower among people with cannabis dependence than cocaine-related dependence. Treatment correlates included older ages in all countries and male sex in Argentina only. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Alcohol/drug treatment use among people with cannabis/cocaine-related dependence remained low, signaling an ongoing treatment gap in the context of growing cannabis dependence prevalence in the region. Additional resources may be needed to increase treatment access and uptake. Future studies should assess contributors of low treatment use, including perceived need, stigma, and service availability.

BACKGROUND:States have enacted multiple types of laws, with a variety of constituent provisions, in response to the opioid epidemic, often simultaneously. This temporal proximity and variation in state-to-state operationalization has resulted in significant challenges for empirical research on their effects. Thus, expert consensus can be helpful to classify laws and their provisions by their degree of helpfulness and impact. METHODS:We conducted a four-stage modified policy Delphi process to identify the top 10 most helpful and 5 most harmful provisions from eight opioid-related laws. This iterative consultation with six types of opioid experts included a preliminary focus group (n=12), two consecutive surveys (n=56 and n=40, respectively), and a final focus group feedback session (n=5). RESULTS:On a scale of very harmful (0) to very helpful (4), overdose Good Samaritan laws received the highest average helpfulness rating (3.62, 95% CI: 3.48-3.75), followed by naloxone access laws (3.37, 95% CI: 3.22-3.51), and pain management clinic laws (3.08, 95% CI: 2.89-3.26). Drug-induced homicide (DIH) laws were rated the most harmful (0.88, 95% CI: 0.66-1.11). Impact ratings aligned similarly, although Medicaid laws received the second highest overall impact rating (3.71, 95% CI: 3.45, 3.97). The two most helpful provisions were naloxone standing orders (3.94, 95% CI: 3.86-4.02) and Medicaid coverage of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) (3.89, 95% CI: 3.82). Mandatory minimum DIH laws were the most harmful provision (0.73, 95% CI 0.53-0.93); followed by requiring prior authorization for Medicaid coverage of MOUD (1.00 95% CI: 0.72-1.27). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Overall, experts rated laws and provisions that facilitated harm reduction efforts and access to MOUD as most helpful. Laws and provisions rated as most harmful criminalized substance use and placed restrictions on access to MOUD. These ratings provide a foundation for evaluating the overall overdose policy environment for each state.

BACKGROUND:The United States overdose crisis continues unabated. Despite efforts to increase capacity for treating opioid use disorder (OUD) in the U.S., how actual treatment receipt compares to need remains unclear. In this cross-sectional study, we estimate progress in addressing the gap between OUD prevalence and OUD treatment receipt at the national and state levels from 2010 to 2019. METHODS:We estimated past-year OUD prevalence rates based on the U.S. National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), using adjustment methods that attempt to account for OUD underestimation in national household surveys. We used data from specialty substance use treatment records and outpatient pharmacy claims to estimate the gap between OUD prevalence and number of persons receiving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) during the past decade. RESULTS:Adjusted estimates suggest past-year OUD affected 7,631,804 individuals in the U.S. in (2,773 per 100,000 adults 12+), relative to only 1,023,959 individuals who received MOUD (365 per 100,000 adults 12+). This implies approximately 86.6% of individuals with OUD nationwide who may benefit from MOUD treatment do not receive it. MOUD receipt increased across states over the past decade, but most regions still experience wide gaps between OUD prevalence and MOUD receipt. CONCLUSIONS:Despite some progress in expanding access to MOUD, a substantial gap between OUD prevalence and treatment receipt highlights the critical need to increase access to evidence-based services.

BACKGROUND:Until recently, few carceral facilities offered medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Although more facilities are adopting MOUD, much remains to be learned about addressing implementation challenges related to expansion of MOUD in carceral settings and linkage to care upon re-entry. This is particularly important in jails, where individuals cycle rapidly in and out of these facilities, especially in jurisdictions beginning to implement bail reform laws (i.e., laws that remove the requirement to pay bail for most individuals). Increasing access to MOUD in these settings is a key unexplored challenge. METHODS:In this qualitative study, we interviewed staff from county jails across New Jersey, a state that has implemented state-wide efforts to increase capacity for MOUD treatment in jails. We analyzed themes related to current practices used to engage individuals in MOUD while in jail and upon re-entry; major challenges to delivering MOUD and re-entry services, particularly under bail reform conditions; and innovative strategies to facilitate delivery of these services. RESULTS:Jail staff from 11 New Jersey county jails participated in a baseline survey and an in-depth qualitative interview from January-September 2020. Responses revealed that practices for delivering MOUD varied substantially across jails. Primary challenges included jails' limited resources and highly regulated operations, the chaotic nature of short jail stays, and concerns regarding limited MOUD and resources in the community. Still, jail staff identified multiple facilitators and creative solutions for delivering MOUD in the face of these obstacles, including opportunities brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS:Despite challenges to the delivery of MOUD, states can make concerted and sustained efforts to support opioid addiction treatment in jails. Increased use of evidence-based clinical guidelines, greater investment in resources, and increased partnerships with health and social service providers can greatly improve reach of treatment and save lives.

Overdose Good Samaritan Laws (GSLs) aim to reduce mortality by providing limited legal protections when an overdose bystander summons help. Most research into the impact of these laws is dated or potentially confounded by co-enacted naloxone access laws. Lack of awareness and trust in GSL protections, as well as fear of police involvement and legal repercussions, remain key deterrents of help-seeking. These barriers may be unequally distributed by race due to racist policing and drug policies, potentially producing racial disparities in the effectiveness of GSLs for reducing overdose mortality. We used 2015-2019 vital statistics data to estimate the effect of recent GSLs on overdose mortality, overall (eight states) and by Black/white race (four states). Given GSLs' near ubiquity, few unexposed states were available for comparison. We therefore proposed an "inverted" synthetic control method (SCM) to compare overdose mortality in new-GSL states to states with GSLs throughout the analytic period. The estimated relationships between GSLs and overdose mortality, both overall and stratified by Black/white race, were consistent with chance. An absence of effect could result from insufficient protection provided by the laws, insufficient awareness of them, and/or reticence to summon help not addressable by legal protections. The inverted SCM may be useful for evaluating other widespread policies.

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.

Structural racism is increasingly recognized as a key driver of health inequities and other adverse outcomes. This paper focuses on structural racism as an "upstream" institutionalized process, how it creates health inequities and how structural racism persists in spite of generations of efforts to end it. So far, "downstream" efforts to reduce these health inequities have had little success in eliminating them. Here, we attempt to increase public health awareness of structural racism and its institutionalization and sociopolitical supports so that research and action can address them. This paper presents both a theoretic and an analytic approach to how structural racism contributes to disproportionate rates of HIV/AIDS and related diseases among oppressed populations. We first discuss differences in disease and health outcomes among people who use drugs (PWUD) and other groups at risk for HIV from different racial and ethnic populations. The paper then briefly analyzes the history of racism; how racial oppression, class, gender and other intersectional divisions interact to create health inequities; and how structural racism is institutionalized in ways that contribute to disease disparities among people who use drugs and other people. It examines the processes, institutions and other structures that reinforce structural racism, and how these, combined with processes that normalize racism, serve as barriers to efforts to counter and dismantle the structural racism that Black, indigenous and Latinx people have confronted for centuries. Finally, we discuss the implications of this analysis for public health research and action to undo racism and to enhance the health of populations who have suffered lifetimes of racial/ethnic oppression, with a focus on HIV/AIDS outcomes.

AIM/OBJECTIVE:To quantify the trends in frequent and occasional cannabis vaping, demographic differences and concurrent nicotine and alcohol use. DESIGN/METHODS:Observational study. Survey-weighted multinomial logistic regression models assessed trends and disparities in past 30-day cannabis use. Trends were assessed overall and by sex, race/ethnicity, parental education and urbanicity. Multinomial logistic regression models also estimated associations of cannabis use (none, use without vaping, use with vaping) with past 2-week binge drinking and past 30-day nicotine/tobacco use. SETTING/METHODS:United States, 2017-19. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Participants in the national Monitoring the Future (n = 51 052) survey. MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:Past 30-day frequent cannabis use (six or more times/30 days) and past 30-day occasional use (one to five times/30 days), with and without vaping. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Past 30-day frequent cannabis use with vaping and occasional use with vaping rose from 2017 to 2019. Past 30-day frequent and occasional cannabis use without vaping declined. Certain groups, such as Hispanic/Latino or lower socio-economic status adolescents, experienced particularly notable increases in frequent cannabis use with vaping (e.g. prevalence among Hispanic/Latino adolescents). Adolescents who reported smoking and vaping nicotine, and 10+ occasions of binge drinking, were 42.28 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 33.14-53.93] and 10.09 (95% CI = 4.51-22.53) times more likely to report past 30-day cannabis use with vaping, respectively, compared with no use. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Cannabis use without vaping appears to be declining among adolescents in the United States, while cannabis use with vaping is accelerating; frequent cannabis vaping is especially increasing, with consistent increases across almost all adolescent demographic groups. Cannabis use among US adolescents remains highly associated with other substance use.