Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including buprenorphine, reduce overdose risk and improve outcomes for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). However, historically, most non-opioid treatment program (non-OTP) specialty substance use treatment programs have not offered buprenorphine. Understanding barriers to offering buprenorphine in specialty substance use treatment settings is critical for expanding access to buprenorphine. This study aims to examine program-level attitudinal, financial, and regulatory factors that influence clients' access to buprenorphine in state-licensed non-OTP specialty substance use treatment programs. METHODS:We surveyed leadership from state-licensed non-OTP specialty substance use treatment programs in New Jersey about organizational characteristics, including medications provided on- and off-site and percentage of OUD clients receiving any type of MOUD, and perceived attitudinal, financial, and regulatory barriers and facilitators to buprenorphine. The study estimated prevalence of barriers and compared high MOUD reach (n = 36, 35 %) and low MOUD reach (n = 66, 65 %) programs. RESULTS:Most responding organizations offered at least one type of MOUD either on- or off-site (n = 80, 78 %). However, 71 % of organizations stated that fewer than a quarter of their clients with OUD use any type of MOUD. Endorsement of attitudinal, financial, and institutional barriers to buprenorphine were similar among high and low MOUD reach programs. The most frequently endorsed government actions suggested to increase use of buprenorphine were facilitating access to long-acting buprenorphine (n = 95, 96 %), education and stigma reduction for clients and families (n = 95, 95 %), and financial assistance to clients to pay for medications (n = 90, 90 %). CONCLUSIONS:Although non-OTP specialty substance use programs often offer clients access to MOUD, including buprenorphine, most OUD clients do not actually receive MOUD. Buprenorphine uptake in these settings may require increased financial support for programs and clients, more robust education and training for providers, and efforts to reduce the stigma associated with medication among clients and their families.

BACKGROUND:Hospitals are a key touchpoint to reach patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) and link them with ongoing community-based services. Although there are many acute care interventions to initiate SUD treatment in hospital settings, less is known about what services are offered to transition patients to ongoing care after discharge. In this study, we explore what SUD care transition strategies are offered across nonprofit US hospitals. METHODS:We analyzed administrative documents from a national sample of US hospitals that indicated SUD as a top 5 significant community need in their Community Health Needs Assessment reports (2019-2021). Data were coded and categorized based on the nature of described services. We used data on hospitals and characteristics of surrounding counties to identify factors associated with hospitals' endorsement of transition interventions for SUD. RESULTS:Of 613 included hospitals, 313 prioritized SUD as a significant community need. Fifty-three of these hospitals (17%) offered acute care interventions to support patients' transition to community-based SUD services. Most (68%) of the 53 hospitals described transition strategies without further detail, 23% described scheduling appointments before discharge, and 11% described discussing treatment options before discharge. No hospital characteristics were associated with offering transition interventions, but such hospitals were more likely to be in the Northeast, in counties with higher median income, and states that expanded Medicaid. CONCLUSIONS:Despite high need, most US hospitals are not offering interventions to link patients with SUD from acute to community care. Efforts to increase acute care interventions for SUD should identify and implement best practices to support care continuity.

BACKGROUND:The United States is in the midst of an opioid overdose epidemic; 28.3 per 100,000 people died of opioid overdose in 2020. Simulation models can help understand and address this complex, dynamic, nonlinear social phenomenon. Using the HEALing Communities Study, aimed at reducing opioid overdoses, and an agent-based model, SiCLOPS (Simulation of Community-Level Overdose Prevention Strategy), we simulated increases in buprenorphine initiation and retention and naloxone distribution aimed at reducing overdose deaths by 40% in New York Counties. METHODS:Our simulations covered 2020-2022. The eight counties contrasted urban or rural and high and low baseline rates of opioid use disorder treatment. The model calibrated agent characteristics for opioid use and use disorder, treatments and treatment access, and fatal and non-fatal overdose. Modeled interventions included increased buprenorphine initiation and retention, and naloxone distribution. We predicted decrease in the rate of fatal opioid overdose 1 year after intervention, given various modeled intervention scenarios. RESULTS:Counties required unique combinations of modeled interventions to achieve 40% reduction in overdose deaths. Assuming a 200% increase in naloxone from current levels, high baseline treatment counties achieved 40% reduction in overdose deaths with a simultaneous 150% increase in buprenorphine initiation. In comparison, low baseline treatment counties required 250-300% increases in buprenorphine initiation coupled with 200-1,000% increases in naloxone, depending on the county. CONCLUSIONS:Results demonstrate the need for tailored county-level interventions to increase service utilization and reduce overdose deaths, as the modeled impact of interventions depended on the county's experience with past and current interventions.

OBJECTIVE:Examine differences in neighborhood characteristics and services between overdose hotspot and non-hotspot neighborhoods and identify neighborhood-level population factors associated with increased overdose incidence. METHODS:We conducted a population-based retrospective analysis of Rhode Island, USA residents who had a fatal or non-fatal overdose from 2016 to 2020 using an environmental scan and data from Rhode Island emergency medical services, State Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System, and the American Community Survey. We conducted a spatial scan via SaTScan to identify non-fatal and fatal overdose hotspots and compared the characteristics of hotspot and non-hotspot neighborhoods. We identified associations between census block group-level characteristics using a Besag-York-Mollié model specification with a conditional autoregressive spatial random effect. RESULTS:We identified 7 non-fatal and 3 fatal overdose hotspots in Rhode Island during the study period. Hotspot neighborhoods had higher proportions of Black and Latino/a residents, renter-occupied housing, vacant housing, unemployment, and cost-burdened households. A higher proportion of hotspot neighborhoods had a religious organization, a health center, or a police station. Non-fatal overdose risk increased in a dose responsive manner with increasing proportions of residents living in poverty. There was increased relative risk of non-fatal and fatal overdoses in neighborhoods with crowded housing above the mean (RR 1.19 [95 % CI 1.05, 1.34]; RR 1.21 [95 % CI 1.18, 1.38], respectively). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Neighborhoods with increased prevalence of housing instability and poverty are at highest risk of overdose. The high availability of social services in overdose hotspots presents an opportunity to work with established organizations to prevent overdose deaths.

Background and aims: Longitudinal studies have revealed that substance use treatment use is often recurrent among patients; the longitudinal patterns and characteristics of those treatment trajectories have received less attention, particularly in the global south. This study aimed to disentangle heterogeneity in treatment use among adult patients in Chile by identifying distinct treatment trajectory groups and factors associated with them. Design: National-level registry-based retrospective cohort. Setting and participants: Adults admitted to publicly funded substance use disorder treatment programs in Chile from November 2009 to November 2010 and followed for 9 years (n = 6266). Measurements: Monthly treatment use; type of treatment; ownership of the treatment center; discharge status; primary substance used; sociodemographic. Findings: A seven-class treatment trajectory solution was chosen using latent class growth analysis. We identified three trajectory groups that did not recur and had different treatment lengths: Early discontinuation (32%), Less than a year in treatment (19.7%) and Year-long episode, without recurrence (12.3%). We also identified a mixed trajectory group that had a long first treatment or two treatment episodes with a brief time between treatments: Long first treatment, or immediate recurrence (6.3%), and three recurrent treatment trajectory groups: Recurrent and decreasing (14.2%), Early discontinuation with recurrence (9.9%) and Recurrent after long between treatments period (5.7%). Inpatient or outpatient high intensity (vs. outpatient low intensity) at first entry increased the odds of being in the longer one-episode groups compared with the Early discontinuation group. Women had increased odds of belonging to all the recurrent groups. Using cocaine paste (vs. alcohol) as a primary substance decreased the odds of belonging to long one-episode groups. Conclusions: In Chile, people in publicly funded treatment for substance use disorder show seven distinct care trajectories: three groups with different treatment lengths and no recurring episodes, a mixed group with a long first treatment or two treatment episodes with a short between-treatment-episodes period and three recurrent treatment groups.

We sought to disentangle effects of the components of a peer-education intervention on self-reported injection risk behaviors among people who inject drugs (n = 560) in Philadelphia, US. We examined 226 egocentric groups/networks randomized to receive (or not) the intervention. Peer-education training consisted of two components delivered to the intervention network index individual only: (1) an initial training and (2) "booster" training sessions during 6- and 12-month follow up visits. In this secondary data analysis, using inverse-probability-weighted log-binomial mixed effects models, we estimated the effects of the components of the network-level peer-education intervention upon subsequent risk behaviors. This included contrasting outcome rates if a participant is a network member [non-index] under the network exposure versus under the network control condition (i.e., spillover effects). We found that compared to control networks, among intervention networks, the overall rates of injection risk behaviors were lower in both those recently exposed (i.e., at the prior visit) to a booster (rate ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.61 [0.46-0.82]) and those not recently exposed to it (0.81 [0.67-0.98]). Only the boosters had statistically significant spillover effects (e.g., 0.59 [0.41-0.86] for recent exposure). Thus, both intervention components reduced injection risk behaviors with evidence of spillover effects for the boosters. Spillover should be assessed for an intervention that has an observable behavioral measure. Efforts to fully understand the impact of peer education should include routine evaluation of spillover effects. To maximize impact, boosters can be provided along with strategies to recruit especially committed peer educators and to increase attendance at trainings. Clinical Trials Registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00038688 June 5, 2002.

Locating undiagnosed HIV infections is important for limiting transmission. However, there is limited evidence about how best to do so. In South Africa, men have been particularly challenging to reach for HIV testing due, in part, to stigma. We pilot-tested two versions of a network-based case-finding and care-linkage intervention. The first, TRIP, asked "seeds" (original participants) to recruit their sexual and/or injection partners. The second, TRIPLE, aimed to circumvent some stigma-related issues by asking seeds to recruit anyone they know who might be at risk of being HIV-positive-unaware. We recruited 11 (18% male) newly diagnosed HIV-positive (NDP) seeds from two clinics in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa and randomly assigned them to either TRIP or TRIPLE. Network members were recruited two steps from each seed. The TRIP arm recruited 12 network members; the TRIPLE arm recruited 62. Both arms recruited NDPs at higher rates than local clinic testing, with TRIP (50.0%) outperforming (p = 0.012) TRIPLE (14.5%). However, TRIPLE (53.2%) was far superior to clinics (27.8%) and to TRIP (25.0%) at recruiting men. Given challenges around testing and treating men for HIV in this context, these findings suggest that the TRIPLE expanded network-tracing approach should be tested formally among larger samples in multiple settings.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Hospitals are an ideal setting to stage opioid-related interventions with patients who are hospitalized due to overdose or other substance use-related complications. Transitional opioid programs-which initiate care and provide linkages upon discharge, such as screening, initiation of medications for opioid use disorder, and addiction consult services-have become the gold standard, but implementation has been uneven. The purpose of this study was to assess disparities in the availability of hospital-based transitional opioid programs, across rural and urban hospital settings in the United States. METHODS:Using hospital administrative data paired with county-level demographic data, we conducted bivariate and regression analyses to assess rural-urban differences in the availability of transitional opioid services including screening, addiction consult services, and MOUD in U.S general medical centers, controlling for hospital- and community-level factors. Our sample included 2846 general medical hospitals that completed the 2021 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey of Hospitals. Our primary outcomes were five self-reported measures: whether the hospital provided screening in the ED; provided screening in the inpatient setting; whether the hospital provided addiction consult services in the ED; provided addiction consult services in the inpatient setting; and whether the hospital provided medications for opioid use disorder. RESULTS:Rural hospitals did not have lower odds of screening for OUD or other SUDs than urban hospitals, but both micropolitan rural counties and noncore rural counties had significantly lower odds of having addiction consult services in either the ED (OR: 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.58, 0.95; OR: 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.50, 0.91) or inpatient setting (OR: 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.59, 0.97; OR: 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.50, 0.93), respectively, or of offering MOUD (OR: 0.69, 95 % CI: 0.52, 0.90; OR: 0.52, 95 % CI: 0.37, 0.74). CONCLUSIONS:Our study suggests that evidence-based interventions, such as medications for opioid use disorder and addiction consult services, are less often available in rural hospitals, which may contribute to rural-urban disparities in health outcomes secondary to OUD. A priority for population health improvement should be developing implementation strategies to support rural hospital adoption of transitional opioid programs.

BACKGROUND:Treatment with methadone and buprenorphine medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) during incarceration may lead to better community re-entry, but evidence on these relationships have been mixed. We aimed to identify community re-entry patterns and examine the association between in-jail MOUD and a pattern of successful reentry defined by rare occurrence of reincarceration and preventable healthcare utilization. METHODS:Data came from a retrospective, observational cohort study of 6066 adults with opioid use disorder who were incarcerated in New York City jails and released to the community during 2011-14. An outcome was community re-entry patterns identified by sequence analysis of 3-year post-release reincarceration, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. An exposure was receipt of in-jail MOUD versus out-of-treatment (42 % vs. 58 %) for the last 3 days before discharge. The study accounted for differences in baseline demographic, clinical, behavioral, housing, and criminal legal characteristics between in-jail MOUD and out-of-treatment groups via propensity score matching. RESULTS:This study identified five re-entry patterns: stability (64 %), hospitalization (23 %), delayed reincarceration (7 %), immediate reincarceration (4 %), and continuous incarceration (2 %). After addressing confounding, 64 % and 57 % followed the stability pattern among MOUD and out-of-treatment groups who were released from jail in 2011, respectively. In 2012-14, the prevalence of following the stability pattern increased year-by-year while a consistently higher prevalence was observed among those with in-jail MOUD. CONCLUSIONS:Sequence analysis helped define post-release stability based on health and criminal legal system involvement. Receipt of in-jail MOUD was associated with a marker of successful community re-entry.

BACKGROUND:The COVID-19 pandemic's impact on utilization of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) among patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) and chronic pain is unclear. METHODS:We analyzed New York State (NYS) Medicaid claims from pre-pandemic (August 2019-February 2020) and pandemic (March 2020-December 2020) periods for beneficiaries with and without chronic pain. We calculated monthly proportions of patients with OUD diagnoses in 6-month-lookback windows utilizing MOUD and proportions of treatment-naïve patients initiating MOUD. We used interrupted time series to assess changes in MOUD utilization and initiation rates by medication type and by race/ethnicity. RESULTS:Among 20,785 patients with OUD and chronic pain, 49.3% utilized MOUD (versus 60.3% without chronic pain). The pandemic did not affect utilization in either group but briefly disrupted initiation among patients with chronic pain (β=-0.009; 95% CI [-0.015, -0.002]). Overall MOUD utilization was not affected by the pandemic for any race/ethnicity but opioid treatment program (OTP) utilization was briefly disrupted for non-Hispanic Black individuals (β=-0.007 [-0.013, -0.001]). The pandemic disrupted overall MOUD initiation in non-Hispanic Black (β=-0.007 [-0.012, -0.002]) and Hispanic individuals (β=-0.010 [-0.019, -0.001]). CONCLUSIONS:Adults with chronic pain who were enrolled in NYS Medicaid before the COVID-19 pandemic had lower MOUD utilization than those without chronic pain. MOUD initiation was briefly disrupted, with disparities especially in racial/ethnic minority groups. Flexible MOUD policy initiatives may have maintained overall treatment utilization, but disparities in initiation and care continuity remain for patients with chronic pain, and particularly for racial/ethnic minoritized subgroups.