Faculty Bibliography

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Treatment with methadone or buprenorphine is the current standard of care for opioid use disorder. Given the paucity of research identifying which patients will respond best to which medication, both medications should be accessible to all patients so that patients can determine which works best for them. However, given differences in the historical contexts of their initial implementation, access to each of these medications may vary along racial/ethnic lines. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To examine the extent to which capacity to provide methadone and buprenorphine vary with measures of racial/ethnic segregation. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:This cross-sectional study included all counties and county-equivalent divisions in the US in 2016. Data on racial/ethnic population distribution were derived from the American Community Survey, and data on locations of facilities providing methadone and buprenorphine were obtained from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration databases. Data were analyzed from August 22, 2018, to September 11, 2019. Exposures/UNASSIGNED:Two county-level measures of racial/ethnic segregation, including dissimilarity (representing the proportion of African American or Hispanic/Latino residents who would need to move census tracts to achieve a uniform spatial distribution of the population by race/ethnicity) and interaction (representing the probability that an African American or Hispanic/Latino resident will interact with a white resident and vice versa, assuming random mixing across census tracts). Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:County-level capacity to provide methadone or buprenorphine, defined as the number of facilities providing a medication per 100 000 population. Results/UNASSIGNED:Among 3142 US counties, there were 1698 facilities providing methadone (0.6 facilities per 100 000 population) and 18 868 facilities providing buprenorphine (5.9 facilities per 100 000 population). Each 1% decrease in probability of interaction of an African American resident with a white resident was associated with 0.6 more facilities providing methadone per 100 000 population. Similarly, each 1% decrease in probability of interaction of a Hispanic/Latino resident with a white resident was associated with 0.3 more facilities providing methadone per 100 000 population. Each 1% decrease in the probability of interaction of a white resident with an African American resident was associated with 8.17 more facilities providing buprenorphine per 100 000 population. Similarly, each 1% decrease in the probability of interaction of a white resident with a Hispanic/Latino resident was associated with 1.61 more facilities providing buprenorphine per 100 000 population. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:These findings suggest that the racial/ethnic composition of a community was associated with which medications residents would likely be able to access when seeking treatment for opioid use disorder. Reforms to existing regulations governing the provisions of these medications are needed to ensure that both medications are equally accessible to all.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Adolescents with opioid use disorder are less likely than adults to receive medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), yet we know little about facilities that provide addiction treatment for adolescents. We sought to describe adolescent-serving addiction treatment facilities in the U.S. and examine associations between facility characteristics and offering MOUD, leading to informed recommendations to improve treatment access. METHODS:This cross-sectional study used the 2017 National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services. Facilities were classified by whether they offered a specialized adolescent program. Covariates included facility ownership, hospital affiliation, insurance/payments, government grants, accreditation/licensure, location, levels of care, and provision of MOUD. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression compared adolescent-serving versus adult-focused facilities and identified characteristics associated with offering maintenance MOUD. RESULTS:Among 13,585 addiction treatment facilities in the U.S., 3,537 (26.0%) offered adolescent programs. Adolescent-serving facilities were half as likely to offer maintenance MOUD as adult-focused facilities (odds ratio, .53; 95% confidence interval, .49-.58), which was offered at 23.1% (816) of adolescent-serving versus 35.9% (3,612) of adult-focused facilities. Among adolescent-serving facilities, characteristics associated with increased unadjusted odds of offering maintenance MOUD were nonprofit status, hospital affiliation, accepting insurance (particularly, private insurance), accreditation, Northeastern location, or offering inpatient services. CONCLUSIONS:The one-quarter of U.S. addiction treatment facilities that serve adolescents are half as likely to provide MOUD as adult-focused facilities, which may explain why adolescents are less likely than adults to receive MOUD. Strategies to increase adolescent access to MOUD may consider insurance reforms/incentives, facility accreditation, and geographically targeted funding.

BACKGROUND:Overdose deaths increased exponentially in the United States to be the leading cause of adult injury deaths, and declining economic opportunity may contribute. To our knowledge, there has been no quantitative research into the impact of relative economic measures on overdose risk. Prior longitudinal studies on impact of socioeconomic conditions used fixed effects approaches that can result in biased estimates in the presence of time-varying confounders. METHODS:We estimated county-level longitudinal associations between drug overdose deaths and unemployment and labor-force nonparticipation rates by gender and racial/ethnic subgroup using longitudinal g-computation and the clustered bootstrap. RESULTS:We find evidence for associations between both overall and relative aspects of unemployment and labor-force nonparticipation and drug overdose mortality; patterns of associations differed, sometime qualitatively, across subgroups. For males across racial-ethnic groups, greater overall and relative unemployment rates were generally associated with greater overdose mortality in both the short and long terms [e.g., for white males, increasing the overall percentage of unemployed adults by 5% points in 2000, 2009, and 2015 is associated with an increase of 3.2 overdose deaths (95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.8, 14) in 2015, and increasing the ratio by 0.5 in 2000, 2009, and 2015 is associated with an increase of 9.1 overdose deaths (95% CI = 1.6, 24)]. CONCLUSIONS:These findings point to important complexity in how the economic and contextual landscape differentially shapes overdose risks, underscoring a need for increased understanding of the mechanisms operating for women and minority groups.

Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are a crucial component of federal and state governments' response to the opioid epidemic. Evidence about the effectiveness of PDMPs in reducing prescription opioid-related adverse outcomes is mixed. We conducted a systematic review to examine whether PDMP implementation within the U.S. is associated with changes in four prescription opioid-related outcome domains: opioid prescribing behaviors, opioid diversion and supply, opioid-related morbidity and substance use disorders, and opioid-related mortality. We searched for eligible publications in Embase, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. A total of 29 studies, published between 2009 and 2019, met the inclusion criteria. Of the 16 studies examining PDMPs and prescribing behaviors, 11 found that implementing PDMPs reduced prescribing behaviors. All three studies on opioid diversion and supply reported reductions in the examined outcomes. In the opioid-related morbidity and substance use disorders domain, seven out of eight studies found associations with prescription opioid-related outcomes. Four out of eight studies on the opioid-related mortality domain reported reduced mortality rates. Despite the mixed findings, there is emerging evidence that implementation of state PDMPs reduces opioid prescriptions, opioid diversion and supply, and opioid-related morbidity and substance use disorder outcomes. When PDMP characteristics were examined, mandatory access provisions were associated with reductions in prescribing behaviors, diversion outcomes, hospital admissions, substance use disorders, and mortality rates. Inconsistencies in the evidence base across outcome domains are due to analytical approaches across studies and, to some extent, heterogeneities in PDMP policies implemented across states and over time.

AIM/OBJECTIVE:Evidence is emerging that prescription opioid (PO) injection is associated with increased health risks. This mixed-methods study compares the mechanics of PO and heroin injection and examines the demographic and drug-related correlates of lifetime PO injection in a sample of young people who inject drugs (PWID) in New York City (NYC). METHODS:Qualitative analysis of 46 semi-structured interviews with young adult opioid users ages 18-32. Interview segments describing PO injection were analyzed for common themes. Quantitative analysis of structured interviews with 539 young adult opioid users ages 18-29 recruited via respondent-driven sampling (RDS). Analyses are based on the subsample of 353 participants (65%) who reported having ever injected drugs. All variables were assessed via self-report, except hepatitis C virus status, which was established via rapid antibody testing. RESULTS:Participants described injecting POs and reported that preparing abuse-deterrent pills for injection is especially cumbersome, requiring extended manipulation and large amounts of water. Injecting POs, in contrast to injecting heroin, requires repeated injections per injection episode. Among RDS-recruited participants, the majority of injectors reported injecting POs, sporadically (33%) or regularly (26%), but often infrequently (≤ 7 days/month). In separate multivariable analyses controlling for syringe- and cooker-sharing, ever injecting POs was a significant predictor of testing HCV antibody-positive (AOR = 2.97) and lifetime experience of non-fatal overdose (AOR = 2.51). Ever injecting POs was independently associated with lifetime homelessness (AOR = 2.93) and having grown up in a middle-income ($51,000-100,000/year vs. ≤ $50,000/year; AOR = 1.86) or a high-income household (> $100,000/year vs. ≤ $50,000/year; AOR = 2.54). CONCLUSIONS:Even in an urban environment like NYC with widespread heroin access, most young PWID have injected POs, although less frequently than heroin. PO injection involves practices that are known to increase risk for blood-borne viral infection (e.g., repeated injections) and predicted testing HCV-positive, as well as overdose. PO injection may also serve as a marker for a subgroup of PWID at elevated risk for multiple drug use-related comorbidities. Programs that provide prevention services to PWID need to tailor harm reduction measures and messaging to the specific practices and harms associated with the injection of POs.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Uruguay and Chile have the highest levels of marijuana use in Latin America and experienced consistent increases over the last 2 decades. We aim to calculate separate age-period-cohort (APC) effects for past-year marijuana use in Uruguay and Chile, which have similar epidemiologic and demographic profiles, but diverging paths in cannabis regulation. DESIGN/METHODS:Age, period and cohort study in which period and cohort effects were estimated as first derivative deviations from their linear age trend, separately by country and gender. SETTING/METHODS:Uruguay and Chile. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:General population between 15 and 64 years of age. MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:Past-year marijuana use from household surveys with five repeated cross-sections between 2001-2018 in Uruguay (median n=4,616) and 13 between 1994-2018 in Chile (median n=15,895). FINDINGS/RESULTS:Marijuana use prevalence in both countries peaked at 20-24 years of age and increased consistently across calendar years. Period effects were strong and positive, indicating that increases in use were evident across age groups. Relative to 2006 (reference year), Chilean period effects were about 48% lower in 1994 and about four times higher in 2018; in Uruguay, these effects were about 56% lower in 2001 and almost quadrupled in 2018. We observed non-linear cohort effects in Chile, and similar patterns in Uruguay for the overall sample and women. In both countries, marijuana use increased for cohorts born between the mid-1970s and early 1990s even in the context of rising period effects. Prevalence was consistently larger for men, but period increases were stronger in women. CONCLUSIONS:Age-period-cohort effects on past-year marijuana use appear to have been similar in Chile and Uruguay, decreasing with age and increasing over time at heterogeneous growth rates depending on gender and cohort. Current levels of marijuana use, including age and gender disparities, seem to be associated with recent common historical events in these two countries.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Medical marijuana law (MML) enactment in the US has been associated with increased cannabis use but lower traffic fatality rates. We assessed the possible association of MML and individual-level driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC), and also under the influence of alcohol (DUIA). DESIGN AND SETTING/METHODS:Three cross-sectional U.S. adult surveys: The National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES; 1991-1992), the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC; 2001-2002), and the NESARC-III (2012-2013). PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:The total n was 118,497: 41,764, 41,184 and 35,549 from NLAES, NESARC, and NESARC-III. MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:Across the three surveys, similar questions in the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule assessed DUIC and DUIA. Ever-MML states enacted MML between 1991-1992 and 2012-2013 (overall period). Early-MML states enacted MML between 1991-1992 and 2001-2002 (early period). Late-MML states enacted MML between 2001-2002 and 2012-2013 (late period). MML effects on change in DUIC and DUIA prevalence were estimated using a difference-in-differences specification to compare changes in MML and other states. FINDINGS/RESULTS:From 1991-1992 to 2012-2013, DUIC prevalence nearly doubled (from 1.02% to 1.92%), increasing more in states that enacted MML than other states (difference-in-differences [DiD]=0.59%; 95%CI=0.06%-1.12%). Most change in DUIC prevalence occurred between 2001-2002 and 2012-2013. DUIC prevalence increased more in states that enacted MML 2001-2002 to 2012-2013 than in never-MML states (DiD=0.77%; 95%CI= -0.05%-1.59%), and in two early-MML states, California (DiD=0.82; 95%CI=0.06-1.59) and Colorado (DiD=1.32; 95%CI=0.11-2.53). In contrast, DUIA prevalence appeared unrelated to MML enactment. CONCLUSIONS:Medical marijuana law enactment in US states appears to have been associated with increased prevalence of driving under the influence of cannabis, but not alcohol.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Evidence from randomized controlled trials establishes that medication treatment with methadone and buprenorphine reduces opioid use and improves treatment retention. However, little is known about the role of such medications compared with non-medication treatments in mitigating overdose risk among US patient populations receiving treatment in usual care settings. This study compared overdose mortality among those in medication versus non-medication treatments in specialty care settings. DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective cohort study using state-wide treatment data linked to death records. Survival analysis was used to analyze data in a time-to-event framework. SETTING/METHODS:Services delivered by 757 providers in publicly funded out-patient specialty treatment programs in Maryland, USA between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2016. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:A total of 48 274 adults admitted to out-patient specialty treatment programs in 2015-16 for primary diagnosis of opioid use disorder. MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:Main exposure was time in medication treatment (methadone/buprenorphine), time following medication treatment, time exposed to non-medication treatments and time following non-medication treatment. Main outcome was opioid overdose death during and after treatment. Hazard ratios were calculated using Cox proportional hazard regression. Propensity score weights were adjusted for patient information on sex, age, race, region of residence, marital and veteran status, employment, homelessness, primary opioid, mental health treatment, arrests and criminal justice referral. FINDINGS/RESULTS:The study population experienced 371 opioid overdose deaths. Periods in medication treatment were associated with substantially reduced hazard of opioid overdose death compared with periods in non-medication treatment [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.08-0.40]. Periods after discharge from non-medication treatment (aHR = 5.45, 95% CI = 2.80-9.53) and medication treatment (aHR = 5.85, 95% CI = 3.10-11.02) had similar and substantially elevated risks compared with periods in non-medication treatments. CONCLUSIONS:Among Maryland patients in specialty opioid treatment, periods in treatment are protective against overdose compared with periods out of care. Methadone and buprenorphine are associated with significantly lower overdose death compared with non-medication treatments during care but not after treatment is discontinued.