Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the completeness and quality of Medicaid comprehensive managed care (CMC) data in national MAX/TAF research files. STUDY SETTING AND DESIGN/METHODS:This observational study compared CMC with fee-for-service (FFS) enrollee data in 2001-2019 Medicaid MAX/TAF inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy files. Completeness was assessed as the proportion of enrollees with any claim and mean claims per enrollee with any claim. Quality was assessed as the proportion of inpatient and outpatient claims with primary diagnosis and procedure codes and the proportion of prescription drug claims with fill dates, National Drug Codes (NDC), days supplied, and quantity dispensed. Acceptable ranges for each study measure were defined as the national FFS mean ± 2 standard deviations. DATA SOURCES AND ANALYTIC SAMPLE/UNASSIGNED:We analyzed secondary data on 45 states from 2001 to 2013 (MAX) and 50 states and DC from 2014 to 2019 (TAF). The sample included adults aged 18-64 with continuous calendar-year enrollment who were eligible for full Medicaid benefits and ineligible for Medicare. We determined CMC enrollment rates and assessed data completeness and quality among state-years with ≥10% CMC penetration, comparing CMC with FFS enrollees. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS/RESULTS:Across 891 state-years, 194,364,647 enrollees met inclusion criteria. Of 540 state-years (60.6%) with ≥10% CMC enrollment, CMC data were largely comparable to national FFS distributions for all inpatient (n = 430; 79.6%), outpatient (n = 467, 86.5%), and prescription (n = 459, 85.0%) completeness criteria and for all inpatient (n = 449, 83.1%), outpatient (n = 511, 94.6%), and prescription (n = 528, 97.8%) quality criteria. Overall completeness (92.3%) and quality (84.6%) improved substantially by 2019. CONCLUSIONS:Completeness and quality of CMC data were largely comparable to FFS data, with increasing state-years meeting criteria over time. Further research on national Medicaid populations should assess and address differences in data completeness and quality by plan type across states, over time, and in relation to specific study samples and measures of interest.

BACKGROUND:Firearm violence remains a leading cause of death and injury in the United States. Prior research supports that alcohol exposures, including individual-level alcohol use and alcohol control policies, are modifiable risk factors for firearm violence, yet additional research is needed to support prevention efforts. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This scoping review aims to update a prior 2016 systematic review on the links between alcohol exposure and firearm violence to examine whether current studies indicate causal links between alcohol use, alcohol interventions, and firearm violence-related outcomes. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA/METHODS:Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, a comprehensive search of published studies was conducted, replicating the search strategy of the prior review but focusing on studies published since 2015. The review included published studies of humans, conducted in general populations of any age, gender, or racial/ethnic group, that examined the relationship between an alcohol-related exposure and an outcome involving firearm violence or risks for firearm violence. Excluded were small studies restricted to special populations, forensic or other technical studies, non-original research articles such as reviews, and studies that relied solely on descriptive statistics or did not adjust for confounders. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:The review included published studies indexed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. Eligible articles were published on or after January 1, 2015. The latest search was conducted on December 15, 2023. CHARTING METHODS/METHODS:Using a structured data collection instrument, data were extracted on the characteristics of each study, including the dimension of alcohol exposure, the dimension of firearm violence, study population, study design, statistical analysis, source of funding, main findings, and whether effect measure modification was assessed and, if so, along what dimensions. Two authors independently conducted title/abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction until achieving 95% agreement, with discrepancies resolved through discussion. RESULTS:The search yielded 797 studies. Of these, 754 were excluded and 43 met the final inclusion criteria. Studies addressed a range of alcohol exposures and firearm violence-related outcomes, primarily with cross-sectional study designs; 40% considered effect measure modification by any population characteristic. Findings from the 21 studies examining the relationship of individual-level alcohol use or alcohol use disorder (AUD) with firearm ownership, access, unsafe storage, or carrying indicated a strong and consistent positive association. Seven studies examined associations of individual-level alcohol use or AUD with firearm injury or death; these also indicated a pattern of positive associations, but the magnitude and precision of the estimates varied. Eight studies examined the impact of neighborhood proximity or density of alcohol outlets and found mixed results that were context- and study design-dependent. Two studies linked prior alcohol-related offenses to increased risk of firearm suicide and perpetration of violent firearm crimes among a large cohort of people who purchased handguns, and two studies linked policies prohibiting firearm access among individuals with a history of alcohol-related offenses to reductions in firearm homicide and suicide. Finally, four studies examined alcohol control policies and found that greater restrictiveness was generally associated with reductions in firearm homicide or firearm suicide. CONCLUSIONS:Findings from this scoping review continue to support a causal relationship between alcohol exposures and firearm violence that extends beyond acute alcohol use to include AUD and alcohol-related policies. Policies controlling the availability of alcohol and prohibiting firearm access among individuals with alcohol-related offense histories show promise for the prevention of firearm violence. Additional research examining differential impacts by population subgroup, alcohol use among perpetrators of firearm violence, policies restricting alcohol outlet density, and randomized or quasi-experimental study designs with longitudinal follow-up would further support inferences to inform prevention efforts.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Opioid-related overdose accounts for almost 80 000 deaths annually across the US. People who use drugs leaving jails are at particularly high risk for opioid-related overdose and may benefit from take-home naloxone (THN) distribution. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To estimate the population impact of THN distribution at jail release to reverse opioid-related overdose among people with opioid use disorders. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:This study developed the agent-based Justice-Community Circulation Model (JCCM) to model a synthetic population of individuals with and without a history of opioid use. Epidemiological data from 2014 to 2020 for Cook County, Illinois, were used to identify parameters pertinent to the synthetic population. Twenty-seven experimental scenarios were examined to capture diverse strategies of THN distribution and use. Sensitivity analysis was performed to identify critical mediating and moderating variables associated with population impact and a proxy metric for cost-effectiveness (ie, the direct costs of THN kits distributed per death averted). Data were analyzed between February 2022 and March 2024. INTERVENTION/UNASSIGNED:Modeled interventions included 3 THN distribution channels: community facilities and practitioners; jail, at release; and social network or peers of persons released from jail. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:The primary outcome was the percentage of opioid-related overdose deaths averted with THN in the modeled population relative to a baseline scenario with no intervention. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Take-home naloxone distribution at jail release had the highest median (IQR) percentage of averted deaths at 11.70% (6.57%-15.75%). The probability of bystander presence at an opioid overdose showed the greatest proportional contribution (27.15%) to the variance in deaths averted in persons released from jail. The estimated costs of distributed THN kits were less than $15 000 per averted death in all 27 scenarios. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:This study found that THN distribution at jail release is an economical and feasible approach to substantially reducing opioid-related overdose mortality. Training and preparation of proficient and willing bystanders are central factors in reaching the full potential of this intervention.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Given the personal and social burdens of opioid use disorder (OUD), understanding time trends in OUD prevalence in large patient populations is key to planning prevention and treatment services. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To examine trends in the prevalence of OUD from 2005 to 2022 overall and by age, sex, and race and ethnicity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:This serial cross-sectional study included national Veterans Health Administration (VHA) electronic medical record data from the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse. Adult patients (age ≥18 years) with a current OUD diagnosis (using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] and International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-10-CM] codes) who received outpatient care at VHA facilities from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2022, were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:The main outcome was OUD diagnoses. To test for changes in prevalence of OUD over time, multivariable logistic regression models were run that included categorical study year and were adjusted for sex, race and ethnicity, and categorical age. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:The final sample size ranged from 4 332 165 to 5 962 564 per year; most were men (89.3%-95.0%). Overall, the annual percentage of VHA patients diagnosed with OUD almost doubled from 2005 to 2017 (0.60% [95% CI, 0.60%-0.61%] to 1.16% [95% CI, 1.15%-1.17%]; adjusted difference, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.54-0.57] percentage points) and declined thereafter (2022: 0.97% [95% CI, 0.97%-0.98%]; adjusted difference from 2017 to 2022, -0.18 [95% CI, -0.19 to -0.17] percentage points). This trend was similar among men (0.64% [95% CI, 0.63%-0.64%] in 2005 vs 1.22% [95% CI, 1.21%-1.23%] in 2017 vs 1.03% [95% CI, 1.02%-1.04%] in 2022), women (0.34% [95% CI, 0.32%-0.36%] in 2005 vs 0.68% [95% CI, 0.66%-0.69%] in 2017 vs 0.53% [95% CI, 0.52%-0.55%] in 2022), those younger than 35 years (0.62% [95% CI, 0.59%-0.66%] in 2005 vs 2.22% [95% CI, 2.18%-2.26%] in 2017 vs 1.00% [95% CI, 0.97%-1.03%] in 2022), those aged 35 to 64 years (1.21% [95% CI, 1.19%-1.22%] in 2005 vs 1.80% [95% CI, 1.78%-1.82%] in 2017 vs 1.41% [95% CI, 1.39%-1.42%] in 2022), and non-Hispanic White patients (0.44% [95% CI, 0.43%-0.45%] in 2005 vs 1.28% [95% CI, 1.27%-1.29%] in 2017 vs 1.13% [95% CI, 1.11%-1.14%] in 2022). Among VHA patients aged 65 years or older, OUD diagnoses increased from 2005 to 2022 (0.06% [95% CI, 0.06%-0.06%] to 0.61% [95% CI, 0.60%-0.62%]), whereas among Hispanic or Latino and non-Hispanic Black patients, OUD diagnoses decreased from 2005 (0.93% [95% CI, 0.88%-0.97%] and 1.26% [95% CI, 1.23%-1.28%], respectively) to 2022 (0.61% [95% CI, 0.59%-0.63%] and 0.82% [95% CI, 0.80%-0.83%], respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:This serial cross-sectional study of national VHA electronic health record data found that the prevalence of OUD diagnoses increased from 2005 to 2017, peaked in 2017, and declined thereafter, a trend primarily attributable to changes among non-Hispanic White patients and those younger than 65 years. Continued public health efforts aimed at recognizing, treating, and preventing OUD are warranted.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:People with chronic pain are at increased risk of opioid misuse. Less is known about the unique risk conferred by each pain management treatment, as treatments are typically implemented together, confounding their independent effects. This study estimated the extent to which pain management treatments were associated with risk of opioid use disorder (OUD) for those with chronic pain, controlling for baseline demographic and clinical confounding variables and holding other pain management treatments at their observed levels. METHODS:Data were analyzed in 2024 from 2 chronic pain subgroups within a cohort of non-pregnant Medicaid patients aged 35-64 years, 2016-2019, from 25 states: those with (1) chronic pain and physical disability (CPPD) (N=6,133) or (2) chronic pain without disability (CP) (N=67,438). Nine pain management treatments were considered: prescription opioid (1) dose and (2) duration; (3) number of opioid prescribers; opioid co-prescription with (4) benzo- diazepines, (5) muscle relaxants, and (6) gabapentinoids; (7) nonopioid pain prescription, (8) physical therapy, and (9) other pain treatment modality. The outcome was OUD risk. RESULTS:Having opioids co-prescribed with gabapentin or benzodiazepine was statistically significantly associated with a 37-45% increased OUD risk for the CP subgroup. Opioid dose and duration also were significantly associated with increased OUD risk in this subgroup. Physical therapy was significantly associated with an 18% decreased risk of OUD in the CP subgroup. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Coprescription of opioids with either gabapentin or benzodiazepines may substantially increase OUD risk. More positively, physical therapy may be a relatively accessible and safe pain management strategy.

BACKGROUND:Buprenorphine and methadone are US Food and Drug Administration-approved medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Although utilization of MOUD was increasing pre-COVID-19, it is not well understood how this trend shifted during and "after" the COVID-19 pandemic in Rhode Island. This analysis will consider the differential utilization of MOUD over time and by key demographic factors. METHODS:We utilized two of Rhode Island's statewide databases to examine aggregate counts of dispensed buprenorphine and methadone from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2023. Data were stratified by age group, sex assigned at birth, and race/ethnicity (where available). Counts were stratified into pre-COVID-19 (Q1 2017-Q1 2020), COVID-19 (Q2 2020-Q4 2022), and endemic COVID-19 (2023) eras. Averages and annualized percent change for each period were calculated to understand how utilization changed over time. RESULTS:Before COVID-19, buprenorphine and methadone utilization were increasing annually. During COVID-19, utilization declined annually by 0.40% and 0.43%, respectively. In the endemic COVID-19 time period, buprenorphine and methadone utilization declined more rapidly at 2.59% and 1.77%, respectively. Declines were more dramatic for adults aged 18-34. CONCLUSIONS:We observed a decline in MOUD utilization during and after COVID-19 in Rhode Island, primarily driven by substantial decreases in MOUD use among the youngest group of adult residents. Interventions specifically tailored to youth, such as school-based or primary healthcare-based programs, may be particularly effective in engaging with youth in substance use disorder treatment.

BACKGROUND:Individuals with opioid use disorder have high rates of hospital admissions, which represent a critical opportunity to engage patients and initiate medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). However, few patients receive MOUD and, even if MOUD is initiated in the hospital, patients may encounter barriers to continuing MOUD in the community. OBJECTIVE:Describe hospital providers' experiences and perspectives to inform initiatives and policies that support hospital-based MOUD initiation and continuation in community treatment programs. DESIGN/METHODS:As part of a broader implementation study focused on inpatient MOUD (NCT#04921787), we conducted semi-structured interviews with hospital providers. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Fifty-seven hospital providers from 12 community hospitals. APPROACH/METHODS:Thematic analysis examined an emergent topic on challenges transitioning patients to outpatient MOUD treatment and related impacts on MOUD initiation by inpatient providers. KEY RESULTS/RESULTS:Participants described structural barriers to transitioning hospitalized patients to continuing outpatient MOUD including (a) limited outpatient buprenorphine prescriber availability, (b) the siloed nature of addiction treatment, and (c) long wait times. As a result of observing these structural barriers, participants experienced a sense of futility that deterred them from initiating MOUD. Participants proposed strategies that could better support these patient transitions, including developing partnerships between hospitals and outpatient addiction treatment and supporting in-reach services from community providers. CONCLUSIONS:We identified concerns about inadequate and inaccessible community-based care and transition pathways that discouraged hospital providers from prescribing MOUD. As hospital-based opioid treatment models continue to expand, programmatic and policy strategies to support inpatient transitions to outpatient addiction treatment are needed. NCT TRIAL NUMBER/UNASSIGNED:04921787.

OBJECTIVE:To ascertain whether a novel expanded social network recruitment to HIV testing (E-SNRHT) intervention recruits men and individuals with previously-undiagnosed HIV at higher rates than risk network recruitment. DESIGN/METHODS:Initial "seed" participants were prospectively randomly assigned to the E-SNRHT intervention or to risk network recruitment. Their network members were included in the study arm of their recruiter. SETTING/METHODS:Three Department of Health clinics and two drug treatment centers (DTCs) in the Msunduzi municipality of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Clinics and DTCs referred 110 newly-HIV-diagnosed adult "seeds" to the study from June 2022-February 2023. E-SNRHT seeds were asked to recruit network members as described below; risk network recruitment arm seeds were asked to recruit recent sex and/or injection partners. Presenting a recruitment coupon (from clinic/DTC staff or another participant) was required for eligibility. INTERVENTION/METHODS:E-SNRHT seeds were shown educational material about HIV transmission risks and then asked to recruit anyone they know (e.g., friends, family) whom they thought could benefit from HIV testing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Rates of recruiting men to HIV testing and locating individuals with previously-undiagnosed HIV. RESULTS:E-SNRHT recruited significantly higher proportions of men to HIV testing (70.3% vs. 40.4%; χ2 = 16.33; p < .0005) and located significantly more previously-undiagnosed cases of HIV per seed than risk network recruitment (rate ratio = 9.40; p < .0001). E-SNRHT also recruited significantly higher proportions of women with previously-undiagnosed HIV (29.0% vs. 10.7%; χ2 = 3.87; p = .049). CONCLUSIONS:E-SNRHT is an important strategy to expand the reach of HIV testing among men and undiagnosed cases of HIV in KwaZulu-Natal.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine (SL-BUP) are both approved for opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment in any medical setting. We aimed to compare the real-world effectiveness of XR-NTX and SL-BUP. DESIGN AND SETTING/METHODS:This was an observational active comparator, new user cohort study of Medicaid claims records for patients in New Jersey and California, USA, 2016-19. PARTICIPANTS/CASES/METHODS:The participants were adult Medicaid patients aged 18-64 years who initiated XR-NTX or SL-BUP for maintenance treatment of OUD and did not use medications for OUD in the 90 days before initiation. Our cohort included 1755 XR-NTX and 9886 SL-BUP patients. MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:We examined two outcomes up to 180 days after medication initiation: (1) composite of medication discontinuation and death and (2) composite of overdose and death. FINDINGS/RESULTS:In adjusted analyses, treatment with XR-NTX was more likely to result in discontinuation or death by the end of follow-up than treatment with SL-BUP: cumulative risk 75.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 73.9%, 77.9%] versus 62.2% (95% CI = 61.2%, 63.2%), respectively (risk difference = 13.7 percentage points, 95% CI = 11.4, 16.0). There was minimal difference in the cumulative risk of overdose or death by the end of follow-up: XR-NTX 3.9% (95% CI = 3.0%, 4.8%) versus SL-BUP 3.3% (95% CI = 2.9%, 3.7%); risk difference = 0.5 percentage points, 95% CI = -0.4, 1.5. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS:Medicaid patients in California and New Jersey, USA, receiving treatment for opioid use disorder stayed in treatment longer on sublingual buprenorphine than on extended-release naltrexone, but the risk of overdose was similar. Most patients in this study discontinued medication within 6 months, regardless of which medication was initiated.