Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine Research Articles

Implementation of a rural emergency department-initiated buprenorphine program in the mountain west: a study protocol

BackgroundOpioid related overdose morbidity and mortality continue to significantly impact rural communities. Nationwide, emergency departments (EDs) have seen an increase in opioid use disorder (OUD)-related visits compared to other substance use disorders (SUD). ED-initiated buprenorphine is associated with increased treatment engagement at 30 days. However, few studies assess rural ED-initiated buprenorphine implementation, which has unique implementation barriers. This protocol outlines the rationale and methods of a rural ED-initiated buprenorphine program implementation study.MethodsThis is a two-year longitudinal implementation design with repeated qualitative and quantitative measures of an ED-initiated buprenorphine program in the rural Mountain West. The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework outlines intervention assessments. The primary outcome is implementation measured by ED-initiated buprenorphine protocol core components. Reach, adoption, and maintenance are secondary outcomes. External facilitators from an academic institution with addiction medicine and prior program implementation expertise partnered with community hospital internal facilitators to form an implementation team. External facilitators provide ongoing support, recommendations, education, and academic detailing. The implementation team designed and implemented the rural ED-initiated buprenorphine program. The program includes OUD screening, low-threshold buprenorphine initiation, naloxone distribution and administration training, and patient navigator incorporation to provide warm hand off referrals for outpatient OUD management. To address rural based implementation barriers, we organized implementation strategies based on Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC). Implementation strategies include ED workflow redesign, local needs assessments, ED staff education, hospital leadership and clinical champion involvement, as well as patient and community resources engagement.DiscussionMost ED-initiated buprenorphine implementation studies have been conducted in urban settings, with few involving rural areas and none have been done in the rural Mountain West. Rural EDs face unique barriers, but tailored implementation strategies with external facilitation support may help address these. This protocol could help identify effective rural ED-initiated buprenorphine implementation strategies to integrate more accessible OUD treatment within rural communities to prevent further morbidity and mortality.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov National Clinical Trials, NCT06087991. Registered 11 October 2023 – Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06087991.

W81 - Implementation Facilitation Improves Clinician Readiness to Provide Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine in Four Urban Academic Centers

W81 - Implementation Facilitation Improves Clinician Readiness to Provide Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine in Four Urban Academic Centers

Addressing System and Clinician Barriers to Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine: An Evaluation of Post-intervention Physician Outcomes.

Emergency departments (ED) are in the unique position to initiate buprenorphine, an evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, barriers at the system and clinician level limit its use. We describe a series of interventions that address these barriers to ED-initiated buprenorphine in one urban ED. We compare post-intervention physician outcomes between the study site and two affiliated sites without the interventions. This was a cross-sectional study conducted at three affiliated urban EDs where the intervention site implemented OUD-related electronic note templates, clinical protocols, a peer navigation program, education, and reminders. Post-intervention, we administered an anonymous, online survey to physicians at all three sites. Survey domains included demographics, buprenorphine experience and knowledge, comfort with addressing OUD, and attitudes toward OUD treatment. Physician outcomes were compared between the intervention site and the control sites with bivariate tests. We used logistic regression controlling for significant demographic differences to compare physicians' buprenorphine experience. Of 113 (51%) eligible physicians, 58 completed the survey: 27 from the intervention site, and 31 from the control sites. Physicians at the intervention site were more likely to spend <75% of their work week in clinical practice and to be in medical practice for <7years. Buprenorphine knowledge (including status of buprenorphine prescribing waiver), comfort with addressing OUD, and attitudes toward OUD treatment did not differ significantly between the sites. Physicians were 4.5 times more likely to have administered buprenorphine at the intervention site (odds ratio [OR] 4.5, 95% confidence interval 1.4-14.4, P = 0.01), which remained significant after adjusting for clinical time and years in practice, (OR 3.5 and 4.6, respectively). Physicians exposed to interventions addressing system- and clinician-level implementation barriers were at least three times as likely to have administered buprenorphine in the ED. Physicians' buprenorphine knowledge, comfort with addressing and attitudes toward OUD treatment did not differ significantly between sites. Our findings suggest that ED-initiated buprenorphine can be facilitated by addressing implementation barriers, while physician knowledge, comfort, and attitudes may be harder to improve.

Impact of Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine on Repeat Emergency Department Utilization.

Recent studies have demonstrated the promise of emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine/naloxone (bup/nx) for improving 30-day retention in outpatient addiction care programs for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). We investigated whether ED-initiated bup/nx for OUD also impacts repeat ED utilization. We performed a retrospective chart review of ED patients discharged with a primary diagnosis of OUD from July 2019-December 2020. Characteristics considered included age, gender, race, insurance status, domicile status, presence of comorbid Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) diagnosis, presenting chief complaint, and provision of a bup/nx prescription and/or naloxone kit. Primary outcomes included repeat ED visit (opioid or non-opioid related) within 30 days, 90 days, and one year. Statistical analyses included bivariate comparison and Poisson regression. Of 169 participants, the majority were male (67.5%), White (82.8%), uninsured (72.2%), and in opioid withdrawal and/or requesting "detox" (75.7%). Ninety-one (53.8%) received ED-initiated bup/nx, which was independent of age, gender, race, insurance status, presence of comorbid DSM-5 diagnosis, or domicile status. Naloxone was more likely to be provided to patients who received bup/nx (97.8% vs 26.9%; P < 0.001), and bup/nx was more likely to be given to patients who presented with opioid withdrawal and/or requested "detox" (63.3% vs 36.7%; P < 0.001). Bup/nx provision was associated with decreased ED utilization for opioid-related visits at 30 days (P = 0.04). Homelessness and lack of insurance were associated with increased ED utilization for non-opioid-related visits at 90 days (P = 0.008 and P = 0.005, respectively), and again at one year for homelessness (P < 0.001). When controlling for age and domicile status, the adjusted incidence rate ratio for overall ED visits was 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.96) at 30 days, 0.43 (95% CI 0.27-0.69) at 90 days, and 0.60 (95% CI 0.39-0.92) at one year, favoring bup/nx provision. Initiation of bup/nx in the ED setting was associated with decreased subsequent ED utilization. Socioeconomic factors, specifically health insurance and domicile status, significantly impacted non-opioid-related ED reuse. These findings demonstrate the ED's potential as an initiation point for bup/nx and highlight the importance of considering the social risk and social need for OUD patients.

Adoption of Emergency Department–Initiated Buprenorphine for Patients With Opioid Use Disorder

Emergency department (ED) initiation of buprenorphine is safe and effective but underutilized in practice. Understanding the factors affecting adoption of this practice could inform more effective interventions. To quantify the factors, including social contagion, associated with the adoption of the practice of ED initiation of buprenorphine for patients with opioid use disorder. This is a secondary analysis of the EMBED (Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine For Opioid Use Disorder) trial, a multicentered, cluster randomized trial of a clinical decision support intervention targeting ED initiation of buprenorphine. The trial occurred from November 2019 to May 2021. The study was conducted at ED clusters across health care systems from the northeast, southeast, and western regions of the US and included attending physicians, resident physicians, and advanced practice practitioners. Data analysis was performed from August 2022 to June 2023. This analysis included both the intervention and nonintervention groups of the EMBED trial. Graph methods were used to construct the network of clinicians who shared in the care of patients for whom buprenorphine was initiated during the trial before initiating the practice themselves, termed exposure. Cox proportional hazard modeling with time-dependent covariates was performed to assess the association of the number of these exposures with self-adoption of the practice of ED initiation of buprenorphine while adjusting for clinician role, health care system, and intervention site status. A total of 1026 unique clinicians in 18 ED clusters across 5 health care systems were included. Analysis showed associations of the cumulative number of exposures to others initiating buprenorphine with the self-practice of buprenorphine initiation. This increased in a dose-dependent manner (1 exposure: hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.16-1.48; 5 exposures: HR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.66-4.89; 10 exposures: HR, 3.55; 95% CI, 1.47-8.58). Intervention site status was associated with practice adoption (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.04-2.18). Health care system and clinician role were also associated with practice adoption. In this secondary analysis of a multicenter, cluster randomized trial of a clinical decision support tool for buprenorphine initiation, the number of exposures to ED initiation of buprenorphine and the trial intervention were associated with uptake of ED initiation of buprenorphine. Although systems-level approaches are necessary to increase the rate of buprenorphine initiation, individual clinicians may change practice of those around them. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03658642.

411 Emergency Department and Hospital Utilization After Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder

411 Emergency Department and Hospital Utilization After Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder

URINE TOXICOLOGY PROFILES OF EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT PATIENTS WITH UNTREATED OPIOID USE DISORDER: A MULTI-SITE VIEW

BackgroundOpioid overdose deaths in 2021 were the highest ever, driven by fentanyl and polysubstance use. ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to characterize drug use, assessed by urine drug screens (UDSs), in patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD) presenting to 28 emergency departments (EDs) nationally and by region. MethodsWe analyzed UDSs from patients enrolled in the CTN-0099 ED-INNOVATION (Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine Validation) trial between July 12, 2020 and March 9, 2022. Participants were adult ED patients with OUD not engaged in addiction treatment with a UDS positive for an opioid, but negative for methadone. Sites were divided into “East” and “West” regions. ResultsA UDS was available for all 925 enrolled participants, 543 from East and 382 from West. Fentanyl was in 702 specimens (76%) (n = 485 [89%] East vs. n = 217 [57%] West; p < 0.01) and was the only opioid in 269 (29%). After fentanyl, the most common opioids were morphine (presumably heroin; n = 411 [44%]; n = 192 [35%] East vs. n = 219 [57%] West; p < 0.01) and buprenorphine (n = 329 [36%]; n = 186 [35%] East vs. n = 143 [37%] West; p = 0.32). The most common drugs found with opioids were stimulants (n = 545 [59%]), tetrahydrocannabinol (n = 417 [45%]), and benzodiazepines (n = 151 [16%]). Amphetamine-type stimulants were more common in West (n = 209 [55%] vs. East (n = 125 [23%]). Cocaine was more common in East (n = 223 [41%]) vs. West (n = 82 [21%]). The presence of multiple drugs was common (n = 759 [82%]). ConclusionsMost participants had UDS specimens containing multiple substances; a high proportion had fentanyl, stimulants, and buprenorphine. Regional differences were noted. Given the increased risk of death with fentanyl and polysubstance use, ED providers should be providing risk reduction counseling, treatment, and referral.

Racial and ethnic disparities in emergency department-initiated buprenorphine across five health care systems.

Opioid overdose deaths have disproportionately impacted Black and Hispanic populations, in part due to disparities in treatment access. Emergency departments (EDs) serve as a resource for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), many of whom have difficulty accessing outpatient addiction programs. However, inequities in ED treatment for OUD remain poorly understood. This secondary analysis examined racial and ethnic differences in buprenorphine access using data from EMBED, a study of 21 EDs across five health care systems evaluating a clinical decision support system for initiating ED buprenorphine. The primary outcome was receipt of buprenorphine, ED administered or prescribed. Hospital type (academic vs. community) was evaluated as an effect modifier. Hierarchical models with cluster effects for site and clinician were used to assess buprenorphine receipt by race and ethnicity. Black patients were less likely to receive buprenorphine (6.4% [51/801] vs. White patients 8.5% [268/3154], odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.78). This association persisted after adjusting for age, insurance, gender, clinician X-waiver, hospital type, and urbanicity (adjusted OR [aOR] 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.84) but not when discharge diagnosis was included (aOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56-1.02). Hispanic patients were more likely to receive buprenorphine (14.8% [122/822] vs. non-Hispanic patients, 11.6% [475/4098]) in unadjusted (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.09-1.83) and adjusted models (aOR 1.41, 95% CI 1.08-1.83) but not including discharge diagnosis (aOR 1.32, 95% CI 0.99-1.77). Odds of buprenorphine were similar in academic and community EDs by race (interaction p= 0.97) and ethnicity (interaction p= 0.64). Black patients with OUD were less likely to receive buprenorphine whereas Hispanic patients were more likely to receive buprenorphine in academic and community EDs. Differences were attenuated with discharge diagnosis, as fewer Black and non-Hispanic patients were diagnosed with opioid withdrawal. Barriers to medication treatment are heterogenous among patients with OUD; research must continue to address the multiple drivers of health inequities at the patient, clinician, and community level.

Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine Treatment in a Population with a High Rate of Homelessness: An Observational Study

BackgroundBuprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorders. A previous randomized trial comparing emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine to standard care showed dramatic improvement in follow-up. This is encouraging, but must be replicated to understand the generalizability of buprenorphine treatment. ObjectivesEvaluate the efficacy of an ED-initiated buprenorphine protocol similar to a previous randomized trial in a different population. MethodsThis ED-based descriptive study described the results of a project implementing an opioid use disorder treatment protocol that included buprenorphine. Patients with opioid use disorder were offered treatment with buprenorphine, a buprenorphine prescription whenever possible, and a follow-up visit to a clinic providing addiction treatment. The primary outcome was engagement in formal addiction treatment 30 days after the index visit. ResultsOf the 210 patients who accepted referral for outpatient medication-assisted treatment, 95 (45.2%) achieved the primary outcome. Two-thirds of these patients received a buprenorphine prescription at discharge; 40% were homeless. A regression analysis revealed one statistically significant predictor of the primary outcome: patients who were housed were 2.49 times more likely to engage in opioid use disorder treatment than patients who were homeless (p = 0.02). ConclusionsIn this descriptive study of an ED-initiated buprenorphine protocol, follow-up was less than that reported in a previous randomized controlled trial. Two important differences between our study and the randomized trial are the high rate of homelessness and the fact that not every patient received a prescription for buprenorphine. The efficacy of ED-initiated treatment may depend on certain population characteristics.

JACEP open annual report 2022.

JACEP open annual report 2022.

142 Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder: Impact on Patient Outcomes at a Community Hospital

Buprenorphine has been shown to be safe and effective in preventing the withdrawal symptoms of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and subsequent relapse into uncontrolled substance use. No standardized protocol currently exists for the treatment of OUD in the ED, and management has traditionally been at the discretion of the physician. This study examines the initiation of a department based protocol based on documented Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) score of prescribing buprenorphine in the eligible population, and following patient outcomes over a short-term interval.

Improving Uptake of Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine: Barriers and Solutions.

Emergency departments (ED) are increasingly providing buprenorphine to persons with opioid use disorder. Buprenorphine programs in the ED have strong support from public health leaders and emergency medicine specialty societies and have proven to be clinically effective, cost effective, and feasible. Even so, few ED buprenorphine programs currently exist. Given this imbalance between evidence-based practice and current practice, proven behavior change approaches can be used to guide local efforts to expand ED buprenorphine capacity. In this paper, we use the theory of planned behavior to identify and address the 1) clinician factors, 2) institutional factors, and 3) external factors surrounding ED buprenorphine implementation. By doing so, we seek to provide actionable and pragmatic recommendations to increase ED buprenorphine availability across different practice settings.

Implementing a Novel Statewide Network to Support Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine Treatment.

IntroductionMedications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including buprenorphine, represent an evidence-based treatment that supports long-term recovery and reduces risk of overdose death. Patients in crisis from opioid use disorder (OUD) often seek care from emergency departments (ED). The New York Medication for Addiction Treatment and Electronic Referrals (MATTERS) network is designed to support ED-initiated buprenorphine and urgent referrals to long-term care for patients suffering from OUD.MethodsUsing the PRECEDE-PROCEED implementation science framework, we provide an overview of the creation of the MATTERS network in Western New York. We also include an explanation of how the network was designed and launched as a response to the opioid epidemic. Finally, we analyzed the program’s outputs and outcomes, thus far, as it continues to grow across the state.ResultsThe New York MATTERS network was created and implemented in 2019 with a single hospital referring patients with OUD to three local clinics. In the social assessment and situational analysis phase, we describe the opioid epidemic and available resources in the region at the outset of the program. In the epidemiological assessment phase, we quantify the epidemic on the state and regional levels. In the educational and ecological assessment, we review local ED practices and resources. In the administrative and policy assessment and intervention alignment phase, the program’s unique framework is reviewed. In the piloting phase, we describe the initial deployment of New York MATTERS. Finally, in the process evaluation phase, we depict the early lessons we learned. By the beginning of 2021, the New York MATTERS network included 35 hospitals that refer to 47 clinics throughout New York State.ConclusionThe New York MATTERS network provides a structured approach to reduce barriers to ED-initiated buprenorphine and urgent referral to long-term care. An implementation framework provides a structured means of evaluating this best practice model.

Barriers to Engagement in Opioid Use Disorder Treatment After Buprenorphine Induction.

Expanded access to buprenorphine induction, including via emergency departments, increases the likelihood of treatment engagement for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). However, longer-term retention among these patients remains a challenge. In this study, we aimed to identify barriers to engaging and retaining patients with OUD in care and additional services that might improve retention. We surveyed counselors at an urban safety net addictions treatment clinic. Twenty-five of 27 (93%) eligible counselors responded. Counselors described patients who were homeless, had no prior treatment history, or lacked health insurance as hardest to retain in treatment. Housing assistance, residential treatment placement, regular access to a phone, and mental health services were thought to be most beneficial for improving retention. Respondents most often reported that screening for services should happen at intake, and almost all respondents agreed that "retention of patients receiving treatment for OUD would improve with a dedicated case manager and/or more coordinated case management services." Engagement in OUD treatment would be improved with interventions to mitigate the significant social and psychiatric comorbidities of addiction. Community- and emergency department-initiated buprenorphine is a promising intervention whose full promise cannot be realized without interventions to improve treatment retention.

Emergency department-initiated buprenorphine protocols: A national evaluation.

ObjectiveEmergency department‐initiated buprenorphine (BUP) for opioid use disorder is an evidence‐based practice, but limited data exist on BUP initiation practices in real‐world settings. We sought to characterize protocols for BUP initiation among a geographically diverse sample of emergency departments (EDs).MethodsIn December 2020, we reviewed prestudy clinical BUP initiation protocols from all EDs participating in CTN0099 Emergency Department‐INitiated bupreNOrphine VAlidaTION (ED‐INNOVATION). We abstracted information on processes for identification of treatment‐eligible patients, BUP administration, and discharge care.ResultsAll participating ED‐INNOVATION sites across 22 states submitted protocols; 31 protocols were analyzed. Identification of treatment‐eligible patients: Most EDs 22 (71%) relied on clinician judgment to determine appropriateness of BUP treatment with only 7 (23%) requiring decision support tools or diagnosis checklists. Before BUP initiation, 27 (87%) protocols required a documented Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) score; 4 (13%) required a clinical diagnosis of withdrawal with optional COWS score. Twenty‐seven (87%) recommended a minimum COWS score of 8 for ED‐initiated BUP. BUP administration: Initial BUP dose ranged from 2–16 mg (mode = 4). For continued withdrawal symptoms, 27 (87%) protocols recommended an interval of 30–60 minutes between first and second BUP dose. Total BUP dose in the ED ranged from 8 to 32 mg. Discharge care: Twenty‐eight (90%) protocols recommended a BUP prescription (mode 16 mg daily) at discharge. Naloxone prescription and/or provision was suggested in 23 (74%) protocols.ConclusionsIn this geographically diverse sample of EDs, protocols for ED‐initiated BUP differed between sites. Future work should evaluate the association between this variation and patient outcomes.

57 EMBED: A Pragmatic Trial of User-Centered Clinical Decision Support to Implement EMergency Department-Initiated BuprenorphinE for Opioid Use Disorder

Emergency departments (ED) are a critical access point for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). Medications for OUD decrease: (1) mortality after nonfatal overdose, (2) withdrawal symptoms, (3) craving, and (4) illicit opioid use. Buprenorphine (BUP) can be safely initiated in the ED and increases retention in outpatient treatment programs. Adoption of ED-initiated BUP has been slow due to lack of physician knowledge, experience, and time. The study objective was to determine the effect of a user-friendly clinical decision support system (CDS) on rates of ED-initiated BUP in the routine emergency care of individuals with OUD. A parallel group randomized pragmatic trial was conducted in 18 EDs across 5 health care systems in the United States. The EMBED intervention is a user-centered, physician-facing CDS system integrated into the electronic health record (EHR) to facilitate ED-initiation of BUP by: (1) determining a diagnosis of OUD, (2) assessing withdrawal severity, (3) motivating patients to accept treatment, and (4) automating EHR workflow including clinical and after visit documentation, order entry, prescribing, and referral. EDs were randomly allocated to the intervention versus usual care using stratified covariate constrained randomization of clusters to arms with a ratio of 1:1. Constraining covariates included EHR vendor, patient volume, practice setting, ongoing resources for OUD patients, and proportion of attending physicians waivered to prescribe BUP. Participants included adult ED OUD patients meeting a predetermined EHR phenotype for OUD and the attending emergency physicians caring for them. Control site visits associated with attending physicians who practiced at both intervention and control sites were excluded. The primary outcome was the rate of ED-initiated BUP (administration or prescription of BUP). Implementation outcomes as compared to usual care were measured using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework. 354, 800 ED visits (166, 184 intervention and 188, 616 control) from November 2019-March 2021 were assessed for eligibility. Overall, 4, 561 OUD patients (2, 457 intervention, 2, 104 controls) under the care of 607 attending physicians (335 intervention, 272 controls) were included in the analysis. Among these patients, 33% and 36% were female and the mean age (SD) was 39.4 y (13.3) and 38.5 y (13.0) in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Though the analysis is not complete at this time, full results are forthcoming and will be available in advance of the ACEP21 Research Forum. This pragmatic trial involving patients with OUD will report the effect of a user-centered CDS system that automates EHR workflow to initiate BUP in the ED.

Retention in Treatment after Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine.

Emergency department-initiated buprenorphine (EDIB) has been shown to be effective in connecting patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) to outpatient treatment. Five diverse emergency departments (EDs) have successfully implemented EDIB programs. 1) To measure attendance at the first referral appointment and 30-day retention in treatment rates for patients receiving EDIB; 2) To describe demographic and opioid use characteristics of patients receiving EDIB; and 3) To determine average length of time in treatment after EDIB at the five participating EDs. All patients receiving EDIB at the participating EDs (n=522) were seen by a peer recovery specialist in the ED and demographic and opioid use characteristics were recorded. Patients were followed prospectively. The referral site was contacted and information regarding attendance at the first referral appointment and 30-day retention in treatment was obtained. All patients still in treatment at 30 days were continually followed at subsequent 30-day intervals until the referral site indicated the patient had ended treatment at their facility. The rate of attendance at the first referral appointment was 77.0% for patients receiving EDIB. At 30-day follow-up, 43.1% of patients were retained in treatment. The mean age of patient enrollment was 36.7 years, 58% of enrollees were male, 90.5% were white, and 73.4% had no medical insurance. Seventy-seven percent reported no substance use other than opioids. The mean time in treatment was 158 days. EDIB programs across diverse ED settings are effective at promoting attendance at the first referral appointment for OUD treatment; however, additional work is warranted to increase 30-day treatment retention rates, particularly among patients with nonprescription-only use profiles.

Barriers and facilitators associated with establishment of emergency department-initiated buprenorphine for opioid use disorder in rural Maine.

The opioid epidemic in the United States continues to grow, particularly impacting rural communities served by critical access hospitals (CAHs) in Maine. Buprenorphine is an effective medication for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) that can be successfully initiated in the emergency department (ED). However, many EDs have not implemented programs to initiate buprenorphine. This study sought to identify barriers and facilitators to successful implementation of buprenorphine programs inCAH EDs. Semistructured interviews were conducted with ED directors of Maine CAHs regarding barriers and facilitators to developing programs for ED-initiated buprenorphine. Seventeen Maine CAH EDs exist and 11 of their directors agreed to participate and completed interviews, which were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic approach. Four themes and 11 subthemes were identified, including (1) compelled to act-directors' personal experiences with patients facilitated the development of buprenorphine programs in their EDs; (2) leadership and mentorship-peer mentorship from other CAH ED directors facilitated, and senior hospital administrators facilitated, or created a barrier in some cases; (3) stigma-fear that EDs would be overcrowded by drug-seeking patients was a common barrier; and (4) follow-up-finding appropriate outpatient follow-up for OUD patients created the greatest logistical barrier. ED directors' clinical experience with OUD patients, supportive hospital leadership, and peer mentorship facilitated ED-initiated buprenorphine programs in rural Maine CAH EDs. Overcoming stigma, developing community outreach, and appropriate follow-up were the greatest barriers. Future research should focus on enhancing peer mentorship, administrative support, community outreach, and staff education.

Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine and Referral to Follow-up Addiction Care: A Program Description.

Emergency department (ED) initiated opioid use disorder (OUD) care is effective; however, real-world predictors of patient engagement are lacking. This program evaluation examined predictors of ED-based OUD treatment and subsequent engagement. Program evaluation in Boston, MA. Adult patients who met criteria for OUD during an ED visit in 2019 were included. Patients were included if a diagnosis of OUD or opioid-related overdose was associated with the ED visit or if they met previously validated criteria for OUD within the previous 12 months. We assessed predictors of ED-OUD treatment receipt and subsequent engagement, using Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set definition of initial encounter within 14 days of discharge and either 2 subsequent encounters or a subsequent buprenorphine prescription within 34 days of the initial encounter. We used generalized estimating equations for panel data. During 2019, 1946 patients met criteria for OUD. Referrals to Bridge Clinic were made for 207 (11%), buprenorphine initiated for 106 (5%), and home induction buprenorphine kits given to 56 (3%). Following ED discharge, 237 patients (12%) had a visit within 14 days, 122 (6%) had ≥2 additional visits, and 207 (11%) received a subsequent buprenorphine prescription. Young, White, male patients were most likely to receive ED-OUD care. Patients who received ED-OUD care were more likely to have subsequent treatment engagement (adjusted rate ratio: 2.30, 95% confidence intervals: 1.62-3.27). Referrals were made less often than predicted for Black (-49%) or Hispanic/Latinx (-25%) patients. Initiating treatment for OUD in the ED was associated with increased engagement in outpatient addiction care.

The design and conduct of a randomized clinical trial comparing emergency department initiation of sublingual versus a 7-day extended-release injection formulation of buprenorphine for opioid use disorder: Project ED Innovation

ED-INNOVATION (Emergency Department-INitiated bupreNOrphine VAlidaTION) is a Hybrid Type-1 Implementation-Effectiveness multisite emergency department (ED) study funded through The Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM Initiative, or NIH HEAL InitiativeSM efforts to increase access to medications for opioid use disorder (OUD). We use components of Implementation Facilitation to enhance adoption of ED-initiated buprenorphine (BUP) at approximately 30 sites. Subsequently we compare the effectiveness of two BUP formulations, sublingual (SL-BUP) and 7-day extended-release injectable (CAM2038, XR-BUP) in a randomized clinical trial (RCT) of approximately 2000 patients with OUD on the primary outcome of engagement in formal addiction treatment at 7 days. Secondary outcomes assessed at 7 and 30 days include self-reported opioid use, craving and satisfaction, health service utilization, overdose events, and engagement in formal addiction treatment (30 days) and receipt of medications for OUD (at 7 and 30 days). A sample size of 1000 per group provides 90% power at the 2-sided significance level to detect a difference in the primary outcome of 8% and accommodates a 15% dropout rate. We will compare the cost effectiveness of the two treatments on the primary outcome using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. We will also conduct an ancillary study in approximately 75 patients experiencing minimal to no opioid withdrawal who will undergo XR-BUP initiation. If the ancillary study demonstrates safety, we will expand the eligibility criteria for the RCT to include individuals with minimal to no opioid withdrawal. The results of these studies will inform implementation of ED-initiated BUP in diverse EDs which has the potential to improve treatment access.