Faculty Bibliography

An increasing number of U.S. states have legalized cannabis, but the effect on adolescent and young adult psychosis-related hospitalizations remains under-studied. Using data from Denver Health between 2005 and 2020, we examined associations between implementation of the Ogden Memo (expanding use of medical cannabis in Colorado, October 2009) and Amendment 64 (legalizing adult-use cannabis in Colorado, November 2012) and trends in psychosis-related emergency department and hospital visits with and without cannabis use disorder (CUD) among youth aged 10-29. Patients with psychosis hospitalizations were predominately male (68 %), white (53 %), and Medicaid recipients (59 %). Significant increases (p < 0.05) were observed in the monthly average rate of psychosis hospitalizations between pre-Ogden memo (21.9 per 100,000) and post-Ogden memo pre-legalization (28.0 per 100,000) and post-legalization (32.3 per 100,000). Similarly, significant increases (p < 0.05) were observed in the monthly average rate of psychosis hospitalizations involving CUD between pre-Ogden memo (2.0 per 100,000), post-Ogden memo and pre-legalization (3.4 per 100,000), and post-legalization (8.5 per 100,000). Interrupted time series modeling found a significant difference in the trends for psychosis hospitalizations involving CUD following recreational legalization (change in average monthly rate went from 0.02/100,000 (95 % CI -0.02, 0.06) to 0.11/100,000 (95 % CI 0.09, 0.13), (difference (0.09 (95 %CI 0.05, 0.14)). Findings suggest an increase in overall hospital encounters for psychosis among youth after the legalization of recreational cannabis. Given the adoption of increasingly permissive cannabis laws, there is a need to plan effective public health responses that could mitigate unintended consequences related to cannabis use.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE:Youth overdose deaths have remained elevated in recent years as the illicit drug supply has become increasingly contaminated with fentanyl and other synthetics. There is a need to better understand fatal drug combinations and how trends have changed over time and across sociodemographic groups in this age group. METHODS:We used the National Vital Statistics System's multiple cause of death datasets to examine trends in overdose deaths involving combinations of synthetic opioids with benzodiazepine, cocaine, heroin, prescription opioids, and other stimulants among US youth aged 15 to 24 years from 2018 to 2022 across age, sex, race and ethnicity, and region. RESULTS:Overdose death counts rose from 4652 to 6723 (10.85 to 15.16 per 100 000) between 2018 and 2022, with a slight decrease between 2021 and 2022. The largest increases were deaths involving synthetic opioids only (1.8 to 4.8 deaths per 100 000). Since 2020, fatal synthetic opioid-only overdose rates were higher than polydrug overdose rates involving synthetic opioids, regardless of race, ethnicity, or sex. In 2022, rates of synthetic-only overdose deaths were 2.49-times higher among male youths compared with female youths and 2.15-times higher among those aged 20 to 24 years compared with those aged 15 to 19 years. CONCLUSIONS:Polydrug combinations involving synthetic opioids continue to contribute to fatal youth overdoses, yet deaths attributed to synthetic opioids alone are increasingly predominant. These findings highlight the changing risks of the drug supply and the need for better access to harm-reduction services to prevent deaths among youth.

Between May 2020 and December 2021, there were 159,872 drug overdose deaths in the US. Higher eviction rates have been associated with higher overdose mortality. Amid the economic turmoil caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, 43 states and Washington, DC, implemented eviction moratoria of varying durations. These moratoria reduced eviction filing rates, but their impact on fatal drug overdoses remains unexplored. We evaluated the effect of these policies on county-level overdose death rates by focusing on the dates the state eviction moratoria were lifted. We obtained mortality data from NCHS and eviction moratoria dates from the COVID-19 US State Policy Database. We employed a longitudinal targeted minimum-loss-based estimation with Super Learner to flexibly estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) of never lifting the moratoria. Lifting state eviction moratoria was associated with a 0.14 per 100,000 higher rate of monthly overdose mortality (95%CI: -0.03, 0.32), although confidence intervals were wide and included zero. Eviction moratoria may not be sufficient to prevent overdose mortality during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:In this article, we studied whether pathways in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment differ among people admitted to residential versus ambulatory settings. METHODS:We analyzed a retrospective cohort of 84,755 adults (ages ≥ 18) in Chilean SUD treatment during 2010-2019, creating a comparable sample of 11,226 pairs in ambulatory and residential treatment through cardinality matching. We used a nine-state multistate model, stratifying readmissions by baseline treatment outcome (i.e., completion vs. noncompletion) from admission to the third readmission. We estimated transition probabilities and lengths of stay in states at three-month, one-year, three-year, and five-year follow-ups. Sensitivity analyses tested different model specifications and estimated E-values. RESULTS:Patients in residential settings (vs. ambulatory) had greater treatment completion probabilities (difference at three months; 3.4% [95% CI: 2.9%, 3.9%]), and longer treatment retention (e.g., 1.6 days longer at three months, 95% CI: 0.8, 2.3). Patients in residential vs. ambulatory settings had higher first readmission probabilities regardless of baseline treatment outcome (e.g., three-month difference: 5.7% if completed baseline [95% CI: 4.4%, 7.0%] and 8.0% if did not complete baseline [95% CI: 6.7, 9.3%]). Third readmission probabilities were higher only among patients in residential settings with an incomplete baseline treatment (at least 3.7%; 95% CI: 0.2%, 7.3% at 1-year). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients in residential settings at baseline were more likely to experience a second treatment and a third readmission among patients with incomplete treatments. Findings underscore the importance of completing initial SUD treatments to reduce readmissions. Residential treatments might require additional strategies to prevent readmissions.

To meet the needs of diverse communities, public health authorities are increasingly reliant on hyperlocal interventions targeting specific health issues and distinct populations. To facilitate epidemiological evaluation of hyperlocal interventions on community-level outcomes, we developed a framework of six practice-based considerations for researchers: spatial zone of impact, temporal resolution of impact, outcome of interest, definition of a plausible comparison group, micro vs. macro impacts, and practitioner engagement. We applied this framework to a case study of an impact evaluation of the New York City (NYC) overdose prevention centers (OPCs) on neighborhood-level drug-related arrests. We used drug arrest data from NYC from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2023 and US Census data to conduct synthetic control modeling, comparing pre- and post-OPC arrests in the neighborhoods surrounding the two NYC OPCs (East Harlem and Washington Heights). We conducted sensitivity analyses to validate our results and compare our findings with those from a prior published study. Our findings indicate no significant change in drug-related arrests following the OPC openings. The mean absolute differences in daily drug-related arrests between the OPCs and their synthetic controls were 0.63 (p = 0.19) in East Harlem and 0.14 (p = 0.22) in Washington Heights. Sensitivity analyses corroborated our main results. Overall, findings demonstrate how our framework can be used to guide future epidemiological evaluations of diverse, hyperlocal public health interventions.

As the United States grapples with an ongoing overdose crisis, states and jurisdictions are adopting novel approaches to reduce overdose mortality. In one novel approach, public health researchers and leaders in Rhode Island leveraged the state's robust surveillance data and collaborations between government, academic, and community-based organizations (CBOs) to launch the PROVIDENT (PReventing OVerdose using Information and Data from the EnvironmeNT) project, a population-based randomized controlled research trial (NCT05096429) in December 2019. The PROVIDENT trial utilizes machine learning (ML) methods to identify neighborhoods at risk of future overdose deaths at the census-block-group level to inform community-level overdose prevention resource distribution. To disseminate the ML model predictions, our research team developed an interactive, online mapping dashboard in close collaboration with three statewide CBOs. We measured whether these organizations utilized the PROVIDENT dashboard to allocate harm-reduction services based on ML model predictions and collected information about their data-driven decision-making processes. This case study describes how we assembled and piloted this overdose forecasting dashboard for use by CBOs between November 2021 and August 2024. By measuring dashboard logins, completed surveys, and engagement with ongoing training, we illustrate how organizations utilized ML and surveillance data to inform their outreach efforts and generate valuable insights at a neighborhood level.

Following federal regulatory changes during the COVID-19 pandemic, Rhode Island expanded methadone access for opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in March 2020. The policy, which permitted take-home dosing for patients, contrasted with longstanding restrictions on methadone. This study used patient-level OTP admission and discharge records to compare six-month retention before and after the policy change. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1,248 patients newly admitted to OTPs between March 18 and June 30 of 2019 (pre-policy) and 2020 (post-policy). We used logistic regression to estimate associations with retention before and after the policy and used a machine learning approach, the Heterogeneous Treatment Effect (HTE)-Scan, to explore heterogeneity in retention across subgroups. Overall, we found no change in retention following the policy, with an adjusted OR of 1.08 (95% CI: 0.80-1.45) and adjusted RR of 1.03 (0.90-1.18). Using HTE-Scan, we identified two subgroups with significantly increased retention above the overall cohort: (1) patients with below high school education and past-month arrest and (2) male, non-Hispanic white or Hispanic/Latino patients reporting heroin or fentanyl use with past-month arrest. We identified no subgroups with significantly decreased retention. Collectively, findings suggest that expanded methadone access may benefit vulnerable populations without harming overall retention.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Specialty substance use treatment programs may adopt harm reduction practices to protect the health of their patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). Two such harm reduction strategies are distributing naloxone to clients and refraining from discharging clients if they have positive urine drug screens for drugs. The purpose of this study was to understand the prevalence of programs that adopt each of these harm reduction practices and the characteristics of clients attending programs that adopt both practices in a sample of state-licensed substance use treatment programs in New Jersey. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional survey of specialty treatment programs in New Jersey about a) naloxone dispensing and b) use of urine toxicology screens in client discharge decisions. We linked this survey to the treatment programs' administrative records of client admissions for OUD treatment between July 2021 to June 2022 (n = 14,838). We estimated the proportion of programs that reported that they adopted each practice. We then examined program and client characteristics associated with applying these harm reduction practices using regression methods. RESULTS:Of 108 programs included in this analysis, 55.6 % dispensed naloxone and 50.9 % did not consider toxicology screens in discharge decisions. Opioid treatment programs (OTP) were significantly more likely to adopt both harm reduction practices than non-OTPs. Clients referred by correctional programs, as opposed to self-referred to treatment, were significantly less likely to attend a program that used either harm reduction practice. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings suggest efforts are needed to increase adoption of harm reduction practices in SUD treatment settings, especially that are not OTPs, and programs serving clients referred by the criminal justice system.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Harm reduction is a philosophical approach to improve the health of people who use drugs (PWUD) that integrates risk reduction, evidence-based treatment, and person-centered care. Specialty substance use treatment programs have historically been siloed from, and often misaligned with, harm reduction principles, but this trend has begun to shift in recent years. This study explored the ways in which some specialty treatment settings are adopting harm reduction principles and practices. METHODS:We conducted qualitative interviews with leaders of 14 New Jersey specialty treatment programs around their opioid use disorder treatment practices. Using thematic analysis, we assessed how aligned treatment practices were with the core pillars, principles, and practice areas outlined in the 2023 Harm Reduction Framework developed by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. RESULTS:Programs described integrating a range of harm reduction principles, including respect for autonomy, low-barrier treatment, and nonpunitive care, into their approach to care. However, several ongoing practices conflicted with these principles, including imposing attendance requirements, lacking an on-site provider to facilitate same-day medication initiation, and use of urine toxicology testing as a major marker of treatment success. Additionally, while many programs were engaging in some overdose prevention practices (e.g., naloxone distribution), few programs offered other risk reduction services. CONCLUSIONS:Findings highlight that significant opportunities remain to better integrate harm reduction principles and practices into specialty substance use treatment facilities to improve the quality of care provided to PWUD.