Perceptions and experiences toward extended-release buprenorphine among persons leaving jail with opioid use disorders before and during COVID-19: an in-depth qualitative study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Extended-release buprenorphine (XRB) offers a novel approach to sustained monthly treatment for people who use opioids in criminal justice settings (CJS). This study explores the experiences of adults receiving XRB as a jail-to-community treatment.Methods and findings
In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted among adult participants with opioid use disorder (OUD; n = 16) who were recently released from NYC jails and maintained on XRB after switching from daily sublingual buprenorphine (SLB). Interviews elaborated on the acceptability and barriers and facilitators of XRB treatment pre- and post-release. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for content related to factors influencing XRB treatment uptake and community reentry. Important themes were grouped into systems, medication, and patient-level factors. Key systems-level factors influencing initiation of XRB in jail included an alternative to perceived stigmatization and privacy concerns associated with daily in-jail SLB administration and less concerns with buprenorphine diversion. In-jail peer networks positively influenced participant adoption of XRB. XRB satisfaction was attributed to reduced in-jail clinic and medication administration visits, perceived efficacy and blockade effects upon the use of heroin/fentanyl following release, and averting the risk of criminal activities to fund opioid use. Barriers to retention included post-injection withdrawal symptoms and cravings attributed to perceived suboptimal medication dosing, injection site pain, and lack of in-jail provider information about the medication.Conclusion
Participants were generally favorable to XRB initiation in jail and retention post-release. Further studies are needed to address factors influencing access to XRB in criminal justice settings, including stigma, ensuring patient privacy following initiation on XRB, and patient-, provider-, and correctional staff education pertaining to XRB. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identified: NCT03604159.
SUBMITTER: Cheng A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8800291 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Few studies have documented patient attitudes and experiences with extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) opioid relapse prevention in criminal justice settings. This study assessed barriers and facilitators of jail-to-community reentry among adults with opioid use disorder (OUD) treated with XR-NTX, buprenorphine, methadone, and no medications. METHODS:This qualitative study conducted individual interviews with a purposeful and convenience sample of adults with OUD who were recently released from NYC jails. XR-NTX, no medication, and methadone participants were concurrently enrolled in a large randomized controlled trial evaluating XR-NTX vs. a no medication Enhanced Treatment As Usual (ETAU) condition, or enrolled in a non-randomized quasi-experimental methadone maintenance cohort. Buprenorphine participants were referred from NYC jails to a public hospital office-based buprenorphine program and not enrolled in the parent trial. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, independently coded by two researchers, and analyzed per a grounded theory approach adapted to the Social Cognitive Theory framework. The research team reviewed transcripts and coding to reach consensus on emergent themes. RESULTS:N = 33 adults with OUD (28 male, 5 female) completed a single individual interview. Purposeful sampling recruited persons leaving jail on XR-NTX (n = 11), no active medication treatment (n = 9), methadone (n = 9), and buprenorphine (n = 4). Emergent themes were: (1) general satisfaction with XR-NTX's long-acting antagonist effects and control of cravings; (2) "testing" XR-NTX's blockade with heroin upon reentry was common; (3) early discontinuation of XR-NTX treatment was most common among persons with high self-efficacy and/or heavy exposure to drug use environments and peers; (4) similar satisfaction regarding effects of methadone and buprenorphine maintenance among retained-in-treatment individuals, alongside general dissatisfaction with daily observed dosing requirements and misinformation and stigmas regarding methadone adverse effects; (5) unstable housing, economic insecurity, and exposure to actively using peers were attributed to early termination of treatment and relapse; (6) individual motivation and willpower as central to long-term opioid abstinence and reentry success. CONCLUSIONS:In the context of more familiar agonist maintenance treatments, XR-NTX relapse prevention during jail-to-community reentry was viewed as a helpful and unique intervention though with important limitations. Commonly described barriers to treatment retention and heroin abstinence included homelessness, economic insecurity, and drug-using peers. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01999946 (XOR), Registered 03 December 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01999946 .
| S-EPMC6771097 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIn 2017, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a monthly injectable form of buprenorphine, extended-release buprenorphine; published data show that extended-release buprenorphine is effective compared with no treatment, but its current cost is higher and current retention is lower than that of transmucosal buprenorphine. Preliminary research suggests that extended-release buprenorphine may be an important addition to treatment options, but the cost-effectiveness of extended-release buprenorphine compared with transmucosal buprenorphine remains unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of extended-release buprenorphine compared with transmucosal buprenorphine.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation used a state transition model starting in 2019 to simulate the lifetime of a closed cohort of individuals with OUD presenting for evaluation for opioid agonist treatment with buprenorphine. The data sources used to estimate model parameters included cohort studies, clinical trials, and administrative data. The model relied on pharmaceutical costs from the Federal Supply Schedule and health care utilization costs from published studies. Data were analyzed from September 2021 to January 2023.InterventionsNo treatment, treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine, or treatment with extended-release buprenorphine.Main outcomes and measuresMean lifetime costs per person, discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).ResultsThe simulated cohort included 100 000 patients with OUD receiving (61% male; mean [SD] age, 38 [11] years) or not receiving medication treatment (58% male, mean [SD] age, 48 [18] years). Compared with no medication treatment, treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine yielded an ICER of $19 740 per QALY. Compared with treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine, treatment with extended-release buprenorphine yielded lower effectiveness by 0.03 QALYs per person at higher cost, suggesting that treatment with extended-release buprenorphine was dominated and not preferred. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine was the preferred strategy 60% of the time. Treatment with extended-release buprenorphine was cost-effective compared with treatment with transmucosal buprenorphine at a $100 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold only after substantial changes in key parameters.Conclusions and relevanceIn this economic evaluation of extended-release buprenorphine compared with transmucosal buprenorphine for the treatment of OUD, extended-release buprenorphine was not associated with efficient allocation of limited resources when transmucosal buprenorphine was available. Future initiatives should aim to improve retention rates or decrease costs associated with extended-release buprenorphine.
| S-EPMC10500382 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceExtended-release buprenorphine (XRB), a monthly injectable long-acting opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment, has not been studied for use in corrections facilities.ObjectiveTo compare treatment retention following release from jail among adults receiving daily sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (SLB) vs those receiving XRB.Design, setting, and participantsThis open-label, randomized comparative effectiveness study included 52 incarcerated adults in New York City observed for 8 weeks postrelease between June 2019 and May 2020. Participants were soon-to-be-released volunteers from 1 men's and 1 women's jail facility who had OUDs already treated with SLB. Follow-up treatment was received at a primary care clinic in Manhattan. Data were analyzed between June 2020 and December 2020.InterventionsXRB treatment was offered prior to release and continued monthly through 8 weeks after release. SLB participants continued to receive daily directly observed in-jail SLB administration, were provided a 7-day SLB supply at jail release, and followed up at a designated clinic (or other preferred clinics).Main outcomes and measuresBuprenorphine treatment retention at 8 weeks postrelease.ResultsA total of 52 participants were randomized 1:1 to XRB (26 participants) and SLB (26 participants). Participants had a mean (SD) age of 42.6 (10.0) years; 45 participants (87%) were men; and 40 (77%) primarily used heroin prior to incarceration. Most participants (30 [58%]) reported prior buprenorphine use; 18 (35%) reported active community buprenorphine treatment prior to jail admission. Twenty-one of 26 assigned to XRB received 1 or more XRB injection prior to release; 3 initiated XRB postrelease; and 2 did not receive XRB. Patients in the XRB arm had fewer jail medical visits compared with daily SLB medication administration (mean [SD] visits per day: XRB, 0.11 [0.03] vs SLB, 1.06 [0.08]). Community buprenorphine treatment retention at week 8 postrelease was 18 participants in the XRB group (69.2%) vs 9 in the SLB group (34.6%), and rates of opioid-negative urine tests were 72 of 130 tests in the XRB group (55.3%) and 50 of 130 tests in the SLB group (38.4%). There were no differences in rates of serious adverse events, no overdoses, and no deaths.Conclusions and relevanceXRB was acceptable among patients currently receiving SLB, and patients had fewer in-jail clinic visits and increased community buprenorphine treatment retention when compared with standard daily SLB treatment. These results support wider use and further study of XRB as correctional and reentry OUD treatment.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03604159.
| S-EPMC8427378 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundExtended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) is an injectable monthly sustained-release mu opioid receptor antagonist, which blocks the typical effects of heroin and other opioid agonists. Use of XR-NTX among opioid dependent persons leaving jails and prisons is increasing despite scant high-quality evidence regarding XR-NTX's effectiveness at re-entry.MethodsThis 24-week, open-label randomized controlled trial examines the effectiveness of XR-NTX as opioid relapse prevention at release from jail (N=85) compared to enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU, N=85). A third, non-randomized, quasi-experimental naturalistic arm of participants who have newly initiated a jail-to-community methadone treatment program (MTP, N=85) allows for comparisons to a methadone standard-of-care.ResultsWe describe the rationale, design, and primary and secondary outcomes of the study. The primary outcome is an opioid relapse event; the primary contrast is a time-to-relapse comparison of XR-NTX and ETAU over a 24-week treatment phase. Secondary outcomes are rates of: (a) post-release opioid treatment participation, (b) opioid, alcohol, and cocaine use, (c) injection drug use and HIV sexual risk behaviors, (d) overdose (fatal and non-fatal) and all-cause mortality, and, (e) re-incarceration.ConclusionsXR-NTX is a potentially important, effective treatment and relapse prevention option for a large US population of persons with opioid use disorders leaving jails. This study will estimate XR-NTX's effectiveness relative to existing standards of care, including counseling-only treatment-as-usual and methadone maintenance.
| S-EPMC5455014 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsTo examine perceptions of extended-release (XR) buprenorphine injections among people who regularly use opioids in Australia.DesignCross-sectional survey prior to implementation. XR-buprenorphine was registered in Australia in November 2018.SettingSydney, Melbourne and Hobart. Participants A total of 402 people who regularly use opioids interviewed December 2017 to March 2018.MeasurementsPrimary outcome concerned the proportion of participants who believed XR-buprenorphine would be a good treatment option for them, preferred weekly versus monthly injections and perceived advantages/disadvantages of XR-buprenorphine. Independent variables concerned the demographic characteristics and features of current opioid agonist treatment (OAT; medication-type, dose, prescriber/dosing setting, unsupervised doses, out-of-pocket expenses and travel distance).FindingsSixty-eight per cent [95% confidence interval (CI) = 63-73%] believed XR-buprenorphine was a good treatment option for them. They were more likely to report being younger [26-35 versus > 55 years; odds ratio (OR) = 3.16, 95% CI = 1.12-8.89; P = 0.029], being female (OR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.04-2.69; P = 0.034), < 10 years school education (OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.12-3.12; P = 0.016) and past-month heroin (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.15-2.85; P = 0.006) and methamphetamine use (OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.20-3.01; P = 0.006). Fifty-four per cent reported no preference for weekly versus monthly injections, 7% preferred weekly and 39% preferred monthly. Among OAT recipients (n = 255), believing XR-buprenorphine was a good treatment option was associated with shorter treatment episodes (1-2 versus ≥ 2 years; OR = 3.93, 95% CI = 1.26-12.22; P = 0.018), fewer unsupervised doses (≤ 8 doses past-month versus no take-aways; OR = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.27-0.93; P = 0.028) and longer travel distance (≥ 5 versus < 5 km; OR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.20-3.65; P = 0.009). Sixty-nine per cent reported 'no problems or concerns' with potential differences in availability, flexibility and location of XR-buprenorphine.ConclusionsAmong regular opioid users in Australia, perceptions of extended-release buprenorphine as a good treatment option are associated with being female, recent illicit drug use and factors relating to the (in)convenience of current opioid agonist treatment.
| S-EPMC7292758 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the current study, we examined factors predicting willingness to receive buprenorphine treatment and preferences for various buprenorphine formulations (oral, injection, implant) among persons in opioid withdrawal management.MethodsParticipants were three hundred thirty-eight persons entering brief inpatient opioid withdrawal management programs at two sites. We used t-tests and Pearson χ2 - tests of independence to compare participants willing and unwilling to be prescribed buprenorphine in the future. Among persons willing to receive buprenorphine, we used multinomial logistic regression to estimate the adjusted effects of potential correlates of type of buprenorphine formulation preferred.ResultsParticipants averaged 33.9 (±9.5) years of age, 70.4% were male, 82.8% were White, and 11.0% were Latino/a. In all, 55.6% of participants had been prescribed buprenorphine in the past, and 54.7% were willing to use prescribed buprenorphine in the future. Those reporting past month illicit buprenorphine use and prior overdose were more willing to use prescribed buprenorphine. Of these (n = 180), most preferred daily buprenorphine formulations (tablet or film) (48.6%) over a weekly or monthly injection (23.1%) or bi-annual implant (28.3%).ConclusionsPast buprenorphine prescription does not predict future willingness to restart. Among those willing to use buprenorphine, newer formulations of buprenorphine appealed to more than half of the participants.
| S-EPMC6152924 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Not enough evidence exists to compare buprenorphine-naloxone with extended-release naltrexone for treating opioid use disorder. Objective:To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine-naloxone versus extended-release naltrexone. Design:Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a previously reported randomized clinical trial of 570 adults in 8 U.S. inpatient or residential treatment programs. Data Sources:Study instruments. Target Population:Adults with opioid use disorder. Time Horizon:24-week intervention with an additional 12 weeks of observation. Perspective:Health care sector and societal. Interventions:Buprenorphine-naloxone and extended-release naltrexone. Outcome Measures:Incremental costs combined with incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental time abstinent from opioids. Results of Base-Case Analysis:Use of the health care sector perspective and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY showed buprenorphine-naloxone to be preferable to extended-release naltrexone in 97% of bootstrap replications at 24 weeks and in 85% at 36 weeks. Similar results were obtained with incremental time abstinent from opioids as an outcome and with use of the societal perspective. Results of Sensitivity Analysis:The base-case results were sensitive to the cost of the 2 treatments and the success of randomized treatment initiation. Limitation:Relatively short follow-up for a chronic condition, substantial missing data, no information on patient out-of-pocket and social service costs. Conclusion:Buprenorphine-naloxone is preferred to extended-release naltrexone as first-line treatment when both options are clinically appropriate and patients require detoxification before initiating extended-release naltrexone. Primary Funding Source:National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health.
| S-EPMC6581635 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBuprenorphine treatment is not equally effective in all patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). Two retrospective studies showed that, among African Americans (AAs), rs678849, a polymorphism in the delta-opioid receptor gene, moderated the therapeutic effect of sublingual buprenorphine.MethodsWe examined rs678849 as a moderator of the response to an extended-release subcutaneous buprenorphine formulation (BUP-XR) in a 24-week OUD treatment study of 127 AAs and 327 European Americans (EAs). Participants were randomly assigned to receive: (1) BUP-XR as 2 monthly injections of 300 mg followed by either 300 mg monthly or 100 mg monthly for 4 months, or (2) monthly volume-matched placebo injections. Generalized estimating equations logistic regression analyses tested, per population group, the main and interaction effects of treatment (BUP-XR vs placebo) and genotype group (rs678849*CC vs CT/TT) on weekly urine drug screens (UDS).ResultsAmong AAs, the placebo group had higher rates of opioid-positive UDS than the BUP-XR group (log odds ratio = 1.67, 95% CI = 0.36, 2.98), but no genotype by treatment effect (P = .80). Among EAs, the placebo group also showed higher rates of opioid-positive UDS than the BUP-XR group (log odds ratio = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.14, 2.79) but a significant genotype by treatment interaction (χ 2(1) = 4.33, P = .04).ConclusionWe found a moderating effect of rs678849 on the response to buprenorphine treatment of OUD in EAs, but not AAs. These findings require replication in well-powered, prospective studies of both AA and EA OUD patients treated with BUP-XR and stratified on rs678849 genotype.
| S-EPMC7883889 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Few studies examine the effectiveness of treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) among Black individuals despite recent evidence suggesting opioid overdose death rates are, in some cases, highest and increasing at a faster rate among Black people compared to other racial/ethnic groups. This secondary analysis study investigated treatment preference, retention, and relapse rates amongst a subgroup of 73 Black participants with OUD (81% male, mean age 39.05, SD = 11.80) participating in a 24-week multisite randomized clinical trial ("X:BOT") comparing the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) between 2014 and 2017. Chi-square analyses were used to investigate treatment preference assessed at baseline, and logistic regression analyses were used to investigate differences in the odds of retention and relapse assessed over the 24-week course of treatment between treatment groups. Our findings suggest no differences in preference for XR-NTX versus BUP-NX. However, similar to the parent trial, there was an induction hurdle such that only 59.5% of those randomized to XR-NTX successfully initiated medication compared to 91.6% of those randomized to BUP-NX (OR = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.04, 0.52). No significant differences were found in treatment retention (intention-to-treat: OR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.43, 3.28; per-protocol [i.e., those who initiated medication]: OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.20, 1.82) or relapse rates between treatment groups (intention-to-treat: OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 0.57, 4.13; per-protocol: OR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.23, 2.06). Although there is a significant initiation hurdle with XR-NTX, once inducted, both medications appear similar in effectiveness, but as in the main study, dropout rates were high. Future research is needed on how to improve adherence.
| S-EPMC7433932 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceBuprenorphine is an effective yet underused treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD).ObjectiveTo evaluate the feasibility (acceptability, tolerability, and safety) of 7-day injectable extended-release buprenorphine in patients with minimal to mild opioid withdrawal.Design, setting, and participantsThis nonrandomized trial comprising 4 emergency departments in the Northeast, mid-Atlantic, and Pacific geographic areas of the US included adults aged 18 years or older with moderate to severe OUD and Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) scores less than 8 (minimal to mild), in which scores range from 0 to 7, with higher scores indicating increasing withdrawal. Exclusion criteria included methadone-positive urine, pregnancy, overdose, or required admission. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, daily for 7 days by telephone surveys, and in person at 7 days. Patient recruitment occurred between July 13, 2020, and May 25, 2023.InterventionInjection of a 24-mg dose of a weekly extended-release formulation of buprenorphine (CAM2038) and referral for ongoing OUD care.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary feasibility outcomes included the number of patients who (1) experienced a 5-point or greater increase in the COWS score or (2) transitioned to moderate or greater withdrawal (COWS score ≥13) within 4 hours of extended-release buprenorphine or (3) experienced precipitated withdrawal within 1 hour of extended-release buprenorphine. Secondary outcomes included injection pain, satisfaction, craving, use of nonprescribed opioids, adverse events, and engagement in OUD treatment.ResultsA total of 100 adult patients were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 36.5 [8.7] years; 72% male). Among the patients, 10 (10.0% [95% CI, 4.9%-17.6%]) experienced a 5-point or greater increase in COWS and 7 (7.0% [95% CI, 2.9%-13.9%]) transitioned to moderate or greater withdrawal within 4 hours, and 2 (2.0% [95% CI, 0.2%-7.0%]) experienced precipitated withdrawal within 1 hour of extended-release buprenorphine. A total of 7 patients (7.0% [95% CI, 2.9%-13.9%]) experienced precipitated withdrawal within 4 hours of extended-release buprenorphine, which included 2 of 63 (3.2%) with a COWS score of 4 to 7 and 5 of 37 (13.5%) with a COWS score of 0 to 3. Site pain scores (based on a total pain score of 10, in which 0 indicated no pain and 10 was the worst possible pain) after injection were low immediately (median, 2.0; range, 0-10.0) and after 4 hours (median, 0; range, 0-10.0). On any given day among those who responded, between 29 (33%) and 31 (43%) patients reported no cravings and between 59 (78%) and 75 (85%) reported no use of opioids; 57 patients (60%) reported no days of opioid use. Improving privacy (62%) and not requiring daily medication (67%) were deemed extremely important. Seventy-three patients (73%) were engaged in OUD treatment on day 7. Five serious adverse events occurred that required hospitalization, of which 2 were associated with medication.Conclusions and relevanceThis nonrandomized trial of the feasibility of a 7-day buprenorphine injectable in patients with minimal to mild opioid withdrawal (COWS scores, 0-7) found the formulation to be acceptable, well tolerated, and safe in those with COWS scores of 4 to 7. This new medication formulation could substantially increase the number of patients with OUD receiving buprenorphine.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04225598.
| S-EPMC11231806 | biostudies-literature