Dataset Information

Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Facilities With Programs for Special Populations.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Special populations, including veterans, pregnant and postpartum women, and adolescents, benefit from opioid use disorder treatment tailored to their specific needs, but access to such services is poorly described. This study identifies the availability of opioid use disorder treatment facilities that use medications and have special programming and contextualizes facilities amid counties' opioid-related overdose mortality.

Methods

Data were compiled on 15,945 U.S. treatment facilities using medications for opioid use disorder listed in the Behavioral Health Services Treatment Locator in 2018. Facilities with programs tailored to special populations (veterans, pregnant and postpartum women, and adolescents) were identified and geocoded. Counties with such facilities were characterized. Cold spots (county clusters with poor treatment availability) were identified using Getis-Ord Gi* statistics. Data were extracted in October 2018 and analyzed from October 2018 to May 2019.

Results

Of all 3,142 U.S. counties, 1,889 (60.1%) had opioid use disorder treatment facilities. Facilities with tailored programs for veterans, pregnant and postpartum women, and adolescents were located in 701 (22.3%), 918 (29.2%), and 1,062 (33.8%) of the counties, respectively. Specific medications provided for opioid use disorder varied, with only a minority of facilities offering methadone (among facilities with tailored programs for veterans, 6.0%; pregnant and postpartum women, 13.2%; adolescents, 1.3%). Many counties reporting opioid-related overdose deaths lacked programs for special populations (veterans, 72.6%; pregnant and postpartum women, 54.8%; adolescents, 30.6%). Cold spots were located throughout the Midwest, U.S. Southeast, and portions of Texas.

Conclusions

Facilities using medications for opioid use disorder with tailored programs for veterans, pregnant and postpartum women, and adolescents are limited. There is a need for improved access to evidence-based programs that address the unique treatment needs of special populations.

SUBMITTER: Hadland SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7484197 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe demand for medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in rural US counties far outweighs their availability. Novel approaches to extend treatment capacity include telemedicine (TM) and mobile treatment on demand; however, their combined use has not been reported or evaluated.ObjectiveTo evaluate the use of a TM mobile treatment unit (TM-MTU) to improve access to MOUD for individuals living in an underserved rural area.Design, setting, and participantsThis quality improvement study evaluated data collected from adult outpatients with a diagnosis of OUD enrolled in the TM-MTU initiative from February 2019 (program inception) to June 2020. Program staff traveled to rural areas in a modified recreational vehicle equipped with medical, videoconferencing, and data collection devices. Patients were virtually connected with physicians based more than 70 miles (112 km) away. Data analysis was performed from June to October 2020.InterventionPatients received buprenorphine prescriptions after initial teleconsultation and follow-up visits from a study physician specialized in addiction psychiatry and medicine.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was 3-month treatment retention, and the secondary outcome was opioid-positive urine screens. Exploratory outcomes included use of other drugs and patients' travel distance to treatment.ResultsA total of 118 patients were enrolled in treatment, of whom 94 were seen for follow-up treatment predominantly (at least 2 of 3 visits [>50%]) on the TM-MTU; only those 94 patients' data are considered in all analyses. The mean (SD) age of patients was 36.53 (9.78) years, 59 (62.77%) were men, 71 (75.53%) identified as White, and 90 (95.74%) were of non-Hispanic ethnicity. Fifty-five patients (58.51%) were retained in treatment by 3 months (90 days) after baseline. Opioid use was reduced by 32.84% at 3 months, compared with baseline, and was negatively associated with treatment duration (F = 12.69; P = .001). In addition, compared with the nearest brick-and-mortar treatment location, TM-MTU treatment was a mean of 6.52 miles (range, 0.10-58.70 miles) (10.43 km; range, 0.16-93.92 km) and a mean of 10 minutes (range, 1-49 minutes) closer for patients.Conclusions and relevanceThese data demonstrate the feasibility of combining TM with mobile treatment, with outcomes (retention and opioid use) similar to those obtained from office-based TM MOUD programs. By implementing a traveling virtual platform, this clinical paradigm not only helps fill the void of rural MOUD practitioners but also facilitates access to underserved populations who are less likely to reach traditional medical settings, with critical relevance in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:PurposeAdolescents 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.MethodsThis 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.ResultsAmong 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.ConclusionsThe 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.

Project description:BackgroundImproving access to medication treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) is a national priority, yet common modifiable barriers (e.g., limited provider knowledge, negative beliefs about MOUD) often challenge implementation of MOUD delivery. To address these barriers, the VA launched a multifaceted implementation intervention focused on planning and educational strategies to increase MOUD delivery in 18 medical facilities. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if a multifaceted intervention approach to increase MOUD delivery changed providers' perceptions about MOUD over the first year of implementation.MethodsCross-disciplinary teams of clinic providers and leadership from primary care, pain, and mental health clinics at 18 VA medical facilities received invitations to complete an anonymous, electronic survey prior to intervention launch (baseline) and at 12- month follow-up. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics, and changes over time were compared using regression models adjusted for gender and prescriber status, and clustered on facility. Responses to open-ended questions were thematically analyzed using a template analysis approach.ResultsSurvey response rates at baseline and follow-up were 57.1% (56/98) and 50.4% (61/121), respectively. At both time points, most respondents agreed that MOUD delivery is important (94.7 vs. 86.9%), lifesaving (92.8 vs. 88.5%) and evidence-based (85.2 vs. 89.5%). Over one-third (37.5%) viewed MOUD delivery as time-consuming, and only 53.7% affirmed that clinic providers wanted to prescribe MOUD at baseline; similar responses were seen at follow-up (34.5 and 52.4%, respectively). Respondents rated their knowledge about OUD, comfort discussing opioid use with patients, job satisfaction, ability to help patients with OUD, and support from colleagues favorably at both time points. Respondents' ratings of MOUD delivery filling a gap in care were high but declined significantly from baseline to follow-up (85.7 vs. 73.7%, p < 0.04). Open-ended responses identified implementation barriers including lack of support to diagnose and treat OUD and lack of time.ConclusionsAlthough perceptions about MOUD generally were positive, targeted education and planning strategies did not improve providers' and clinical leaders' perceptions of MOUD over time. Strategies that improve leaders' prioritization and support of MOUD and address time constraints related to delivering MOUD may increase access to MOUD in non-substance use treatment clinics.

Project description:ImportanceState Medicaid programs have implemented initiatives to expand treatment coverage for opioid use disorder (OUD); however, some Medicaid programs still require prior authorizations (PAs) for filling buprenorphine prescriptions.ObjectiveTo evaluate the changes in buprenorphine use for OUD among Medicaid enrollees in states that completely removed buprenorphine PA requirements.Design setting and participantsThis retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed the immediate and trend changes on buprenorphine use during 2013 to 2020 associated with removal of PA requirements using a controlled interrupted time series analysis to account for autocorrelation. Data were collected from Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data for 2 states (California and Illinois) that completely removed a buprenorphine PA during the study period, and buprenorphine prescriptions for OUD treatment were identified among Medicaid enrollees.Main outcomes and measuresQuarterly total number of buprenorphine prescriptions for each state was calculated, and stratification analyses were conducted by dosage form (films and tablets).ResultsAmong the 2 state Medicaid programs (California and Illinois) that removed buprenorphine PAs, there was a total of 702 643 and 415 115 eligible buprenorphine prescription claims, respectively. After removing PA requirements for buprenorphine, there was an immediate increase that was not statistically significant (rate ratio [RR], 1.11; 95% CI, 0.76-1.61) in the number of all buprenorphine prescriptions in California and a statistically significant increase (RR, 6.99; 95% CI, 4.67-10.47) in the number of all buprenorphine prescriptions in Illinois relative to the change in the control states (Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Nevada, South Dakota, and Wyoming). Additionally, there was a statistically significant decreasing trend in the number of all buprenorphine prescriptions in California (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.94) and a statistically significant increasing trend in Illinois (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19) relative to the trend in control states.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, removal of buprenorphine PA requirements was associated with a statistically significant increase in the number of buprenorphine prescription fills among Medicaid populations in 1 of the 2 included states.