Specialty Substance Use Research Articles

Changes in legal referrals to specialty substance use disorder treatment from 2015–2019

BackgroundThe policy landscape around substance use has changed dramatically in the past decade, which may have affected the number and characteristics of treatment episodes for substance use disorder (SUD). In this study, we examine changes in the volume of SUD treatment referrals from the legal system and compare changes in the composition of substances used by referral source. We used publicly available discharge data on specialty SUD treatment episodes in the U.S. from 2015–2019 and included episodes involving adults that are discharged from specialty SUD treatment facilities during the study. We calculated descriptive statistics of specialty SUD treatment discharges in each year and aggregated across all years by referral source and substance(s) reported upon admission. To test differences by year and referral source, we conducted z-tests of proportions.ResultsThe proportion of referrals to specialty SUD treatment from the legal system declined between 2015 and 2019 (p < 0.001). However, referrals from probation/parole and diversionary programs grew over time (p < 0.001) in number and proportion over time. Legal referrals were most often associated with alcohol or cannabis use, though referrals for these substances declined from 2015–2019.ConclusionsThis research lays the groundwork for future investigations to evaluate the effect of important policy changes on referral sources to specialty SUD treatment and the quality and outcomes associated with referrals to treatment from the legal system.

Client and program-level factors associated with planned use of medications for opioid use disorder in specialty substance use treatment programs: Evidence from linked administrative data and survey data

BackgroundMost patients in specialty drug treatment programs that are not federally licensed Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) programs do not receive medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). MethodsWe linked results from a survey of non-OTP treatment program directors in New Jersey (n = 81) to statewide administrative records of admissions for opioid use to those programs between July 2021–June 2022. Using multi-level regression, we examined the association of three types of factors with planned MOUD use: program survey responses, client-level factors, and program-level client characteristic mix. ResultsOf 9583 opioid treatment admissions in non-OTP settings, 41 % included treatment plans involving MOUD. Programs where directors reported staff concerns about buprenorphine's efficacy or diversion had a lower proportion of clients with planned MOUD, as did programs reporting too little physical space to prescribe. Being self-referred to treatment, unemployed and not looking for work, aged 30–49, heroin use (vs. prescription opioid use), and stimulant use in addition to opioids, were positively associated with planned MOUD; while non-Medicaid insurance, and Black and Hispanic race/ethnicity, were negatively associated with planned MOUD. Clients were more likely to have planned MOUD if their programs had a higher proportion of clients aged 30 or older, heroin as primary “drug of abuse,” stimulant use, and not working but actively looking for work. ConclusionFindings suggest addressing program staff attitudes toward buprenorphine could help increase planned MOUD. There is also a need to improve access for clients with non-Medicaid insurance, address within-program race and ethnic disparities, and address employment-related barriers to medication.

Risk factors of substance use treatment gaps among a nationally representative sample of black American adults in relation to sexual minority status and health insurance coverage

BackgroundLittle research has investigated predictors of specialty substance use treatment gaps among Black adults. This study examined differential odds of experiencing self-reported, past-year treatment gaps among Black adults with respect to sexual minority status and health insurance coverage, accounting for social cofactors.MethodThis cross-sectional study comprised 36,098 Black Americans aged 18 and older who completed the 2015–2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) and provided responses for all selected survey items. Design-based multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine predictors of drug and alcohol treatment gaps.ResultsSexual minority Black adults reported greater odds of experiencing treatment gaps to specialty treatment (i.e., inpatient hospital, inpatient/outpatient rehabilitation facility, or mental health center) compared to Black heterosexuals in adjusted models (Gay or lesbian: AOR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.39–2.89; Bisexual: AOR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.77–3.12), with bisexual Black women experiencing the greatest odds (AOR = 3.10, 95% CI = 2.33–4.14). Black adults with no health insurance were significantly more likely to report substance use treatment gaps relative to their peers with health insurance coverage (AOR = 50, 95% CI = 1.26–1.78).ConclusionThe results suggest a critical need for more investigations into patterns of specialty substance use treatment gaps within Black populations and for developing sexual identity-affirming mechanisms for closing the disparity gap, particularly for Black sexual minorities and those who lack health insurance coverage.

Evaluating preferences for medication formulation and treatment model among people who use opioids non-medically: A web-based cross-sectional study

IntroductionOver the past decade, treatment for opioid use disorder has expanded to include long-acting injectable and implantable formulations of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and integrated treatment models systematically addressing both behavioral and physical health. Patient preference for these treatment options has been underexplored. Gathering data on OUD treatment preferences is critical to guide the development of patient-centered treatment for OUD. This cross-sectional study assessed preferences for long-acting MOUD and integrated treatment using an online survey. MethodsAn online Qualtrics survey assessed preferences for MOUD formulation and integrated treatment models. The study recruited participants (n = 851) in October and November 2019 through advertisements or posts on Facebook, Google AdWords, Reddit, and Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk). Eligible participants scored a two or higher on the opioid pain reliever or heroin scales of the Tobacco, Alcohol Prescription Medication and other Substance Use (TAPS) Tool. Structured survey items obtained patient preference for MOUD formulation and treatment model. Using stated preference methods, the study assessed preference via comparison of preferred options for MOUD and treatment model. ResultsIn the past year, 824 (96.8 %) participants reported non-prescribed use of opioid pain relievers (mean TAPS score = 2.72, SD = 0.46) and 552 (64.9 %) reported heroin or fentanyl use (mean TAPS score = 2.73, SD = 0.51). Seventy-four percent of participants (n = 631) reported currently or previously receiving OUD treatment, with 407 (48.4 %) receiving MOUD. When asked about preferences for type of MOUD formulation, 452 (53.1 %) preferred a daily oral formulation, 115 (13.5 %) preferred an implant, 114 (13.4 %) preferred a monthly injection and 95 (11.2 %) preferred a weekly injection. Approximately 8.8 % (n = 75) would not consider MOUD regardless of formulation. The majority of participants (65.2 %, n = 555) preferred receiving treatment in a specialized substance use treatment program distinct from their medical care, compared with receiving care in an integrated model (n = 296, 34.8 %). ConclusionsThough most participants expressed willingness to try long-acting MOUD formulations, the majority preferred short-acting formulations. Likewise, the majority preferred non-integrated treatment in specialty substance use settings. Reasons for these preferences provide insight on developing effective educational tools for patients and suggesting targets for intervention to develop a more acceptable treatment system.

Barriers and facilitators to use of buprenorphine in state-licensed specialty substance use treatment programs: A survey of program leadership

IntroductionMedications 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. MethodsWe 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. ResultsMost 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 %). ConclusionsAlthough 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.

Is that a treatment program? Examining the physical landscape of opioid treatment programs in Los Angeles

IntroductionLittle attention has been paid to the built environment of outpatient opioid treatment programs, despite the need to increase access to medications for opioid use disorder, particularly among people of color. The aims of this study were to rate the attractiveness of publicly-funded opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in Los Angeles County and explore whether less attractive OTPs are found in disadvantaged neighborhoods. MethodsWe conducted observations of the exteriors of all OTPs located in specialty substance use disorder treatment clinics in Los Angeles County in 2021 (N = 44). We created an attractiveness index based on attractiveness of the building exteriors and the surrounding grounds, the presence of disorder such as garbage and graffiti, and the presence of bars on the windows. We tested whether less attractive facilities were more likely to be situated in disadvantaged neighborhoods with high concentrations of racial/ethnic minorities. ResultsMost building exteriors were found to have an ordinary level of attractiveness or rated as unattractive. The grounds were largely unattractive. We found a significant negative association between attractiveness and neighborhood disadvantage. ConclusionThis project was a preliminary study of the physical conditions of OTPs in Los Angeles. We found was that the physical conditions of OTPs in LA County were generally poor. Research has identified many individual and structural barriers to treatment for people with opioid use disorders. Future research should empirically test the association between the built environment of treatment clinics and access to treatment, particularly in communities of color.

Has the treatment gap for opioid use disorder narrowed in the U.S.?: A yearly assessment from 2010 to 2019".

The United States overdose crisis continues unabated. Despite efforts to increase capacity for treating opioid use disorder (OUD) in the U.S., how actual treatment receipt compares to need remains unclear. In this cross-sectional study, we estimate progress in addressing the gap between OUD prevalence and OUD treatment receipt at the national and state levels from 2010 to 2019. We estimated past-year OUD prevalence rates based on the U.S. National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), using adjustment methods that attempt to account for OUD underestimation in national household surveys. We used data from specialty substance use treatment records and outpatient pharmacy claims to estimate the gap between OUD prevalence and number of persons receiving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) during the past decade. Adjusted estimates suggest past-year OUD affected 7,631,804 individuals in the U.S. in (2,773 per 100,000 adults 12+), relative to only 1,023,959 individuals who received MOUD (365 per 100,000 adults 12+). This implies approximately 86.6% of individuals with OUD nationwide who may benefit from MOUD treatment do not receive it. MOUD receipt increased across states over the past decade, but most regions still experience wide gaps between OUD prevalence and MOUD receipt. Despite some progress in expanding access to MOUD, a substantial gap between OUD prevalence and treatment receipt highlights the critical need to increase access to evidence-based services.

Utilizing SBIRT as a Framework for Transforming How We Think About Prevention and Early Intervention for Youth and Young Adults

Utilizing SBIRT as a Framework for Transforming How We Think About Prevention and Early Intervention for Youth and Young Adults

Factors associated with clinician treatment recommendations for patients with a new diagnosis of opioid use disorder

BackgroundThis study examined factors associated with treatment recommendations for patients with a new diagnosis of opioid use disorder (OUD), comparing recommendations for patients with clear signs of OUD versus those with lower likelihood of OUD. MethodsThe study conducted a retrospective medical chart review in a randomly selected national sample of 520 Veteran Health Administration patients with a new opioid-related electronic health record (EHR) diagnosis from 2012 to 2017. The study categorized patients as having “high likelihood” or “lower likelihood of OUD” based on the presence or absence of clinician documentation in medical records of specific qualifying criteria (e.g., clinician documentation of patient meeting diagnostic criteria for OUD, etc). Analyses examined the association between baseline demographic and clinical characteristics with recommendations for medication and other treatments for OUD. ResultsAmong patients with a new diagnosis of OUD, 28.7 % (n = 149) were recommended medication treatment, 52.5 % (n = 273) were recommended specialty substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and 41.9 % (n = 218) were recommended treatment in non-SUD mental health settings. In adjusted models, high likelihood of OUD (AOR 8.31, 95 % CI 4.81–15.03) was strongly associated with the clinician recommending medications for OUD, while age 56–75 (compared to <35, AOR 0.36, 95 % CI 0.18–0.69), stimulant use disorder (AOR 0.28, 95 % CI 0.15–0.53), and rural residence (AOR 0.51, 95 % CI 0.30–0.85) were associated with lower likelihood of being recommended medication treatment. ConclusionsDifferentiating among patients with EHR diagnoses of OUD to identify the subset with higher likelihood of underlying OUD is important to accurately understand OUD treatment rates and disparities. However, even among patients with a clear diagnosis of OUD, medication treatment is still recommended less often than other treatments, suggesting interventions are needed to encourage clinicians to prioritize medication treatment as a first-line treatment, especially for older, rural patients and those with polysubstance use.

HIV and Hepatitis C Virus Testing and Treatment Services in Specialty Treatment Facilities That Offer Medication for Opioid Use Disorder in the US

This study assesses HIV and hepatitis C testing and treatment availability in US specialty substance use disorder treatment facilities that offered medication for opioid use disorder in 2017-2020, stratified between federally certified Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) and non-OTPs.

Availability of Medications for the Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder in U.S. Counties, 2016–2019

Although numerous studies have examined the geographic availability of medications for opioid use disorder, none have measured the availability of medications for alcohol use disorder (MAUD) in the United States. We examined county-level trends in MAUD offerings in the specialty substance use disorder treatment system and compared MAUD availability with local geographic characteristics and alcohol use disorder treatment need. We constructed annual county-level measures of MAUD availability for 2016-2019 using the National Directory of Drug and Alcohol Abuse Treatment Facilities, determining the number of outpatient facilities offering MAUD in each county (n = 12,568). Two-part, multivariable regression models estimated the association between MAUD availability and temporal trends, census region, urbanicity, and prevalence of excessive drinking. Availability of MAUD increased significantly over the study period. By 2019, 38% of U.S. facilities offered at least one MAUD, 40% of counties had at least one specialty treatment facility offering MAUD, and counties with at least one facility had an average of 3.36 MAUD facilities. Availability was significantly higher in urban counties and in the Northeast (both p < .01), but not in counties with higher prevalence of excessive drinking. We observed large increases in the availability of MAUD in the U.S. specialty treatment system from 2016 to 2019. Although these results are encouraging, a majority (60%) of U.S. counties did not have a specialty outpatient treatment facility that offered MAUD in 2019. Additional efforts are needed to improve availability of MAUD, especially in rural counties and in the southern and midwestern United States.

Hospital SUD Programs, Psychiatric Hospitals Lag in Electronic Health Record Use

Hospital SUD Programs, Psychiatric Hospitals Lag in Electronic Health Record Use

Use of Electronic Health Information Technology in a National Sample of Hospitals That Provide Specialty Substance Use Care.

Most U.S. acute care hospitals have adopted basic electronic health record (EHR) functionality and health information exchange (HIE) (84% and 88%, respectively, in 2017). This study examined whether rates of EHR and HIE adoption by hospital-based substance use disorder programs are lower than rates by acute care hospitals. Data from the 2017 National Survey on Substance Abuse Treatment Services were analyzed to examine adoption of basic EHR functionality (i.e., assessment, progress monitoring, discharge, labs, and prescription dispensing) and use of HIE by hospital-based programs. Analyses used weighted multivariable models of EHR and HIE outcomes, adjusted for nonresponse. Of 894 hospital-based substance use disorder programs with EHR information, two-thirds (N=606, 68%) reported use of basic EHR functionality. Psychiatric hospitals were less likely than acute care hospitals to have adopted EHR (odds ratio [OR]=0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.35-0.71). Compared with nonprofit hospitals, for-profit (OR=0.23, 95% CI=0.16-0.35) and government-owned (OR=0.52, 95% CI=0.33-0.83) hospitals were less likely to use basic EHR functionality. Hospital-based programs providing medications for alcohol or opioid use disorders were more likely than those not providing such medications to use basic EHR (OR=1.95, 95% CI=1.31-2.90). Of 839 hospitals with information on HIE use, 598 (71%) reported using electronic HIE. Adoption of basic EHR functionality was the strongest predictor of HIE use (OR=4.73, 95% CI=3.29-6.79). Hospital-based substance use disorder programs trail behind U.S. acute care hospitals in adoption of basic EHR and electronic HIE. Findings raise concerns about missed opportunities to improve hospital-based substance use disorder care quality and performance measurement.

Medicaid Expansion and Availability of Opioid Medications in the Specialty Substance Use Disorder Treatment System.

Research has examined the effect of Medicaid expansion on access to physicians with buprenorphine waivers, but less attention has been paid to Medicaid's impact on opioid use disorder medication availability within the specialty substance use disorder treatment system. To address this gap in the literature, this study examined the impact of Medicaid expansion on availability of opioid medications in specialty programs. This study used data from the National Survey of the Substance Abuse Treatment Services (2002-2017), containing all known substance use disorder treatment programs in the United States, to examine the effect of Medicaid expansion on the availability of opioid use disorder medications by treatment program ownership type (publicly owned, private for profit, and private nonprofit) among opioid treatment programs (OTPs) and non-OTPs. The effects of Medicaid expansion were limited to nonprofit and for-profit OTPs. Medicaid expansion was associated with 135.1% and 57.5% increases in the number of nonprofit and for-profit OTPs offering injectable naltrexone, respectively, and with a 64.4% increase in the number of nonprofit OTPs offering buprenorphine. Nonprofit and for-profit OTPs compose <10% of the treatment system, indicating that improvements in opioid use disorder treatment associated with Medicaid expansion were limited to a small share of the specialty system. The limited impact of Medicaid expansion on the specialty treatment system may perpetuate disparities in the accessibility and quality of opioid use disorder treatment for Medicaid enrollees and fail to alleviate high rates of opioid use disorder and opioid overdose deaths in this vulnerable population.

Insurance expansions and adolescent use of substance use disorder treatment.

To provide evidence on the effects of expansions to private and public insurance programs on adolescent specialty substance use disorder (SUD) treatment use. The Treatment Episodes Data Set (TEDS), 1996 to 2017. A quasi-experimental difference-in-differences design using observational data. The TEDS provides administrative data on admissions to specialty SUD treatment. Expansions of laws that compel private insurers to cover SUD treatment services at parity with general health care increase adolescent admissions by 26% (P<.05). These increases are driven by nonintensive outpatient admissions, the most common treatment episodes, which rise by 30% (P<.05) postparity law. In contrast, increases in income eligibility for public insurance targeting those 6-18years old are not statistically associated with SUD treatment. Private insurance expansions allow more adolescents to receive SUD treatment, while public insurance income eligibility expansions do not appear to influence adolescent SUD treatment.

Opioid agonist treatment is highly protective against overdose death among a U.S. statewide population of justice-involved adults

ABSTRACT Background: Persons with justice-involvement have high rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose and are a critical target of policy initiatives to improve access to evidence-based medications for OUD. However, less is known about what characteristics of justice-involved persons make them more or less likely to receive evidence-based care. Objectives: Focusing on a Maryland state-wide sample of justice-involved individuals, this study explores predictors of OUD treatment utilization and the relationship between referral source to treatment, treatment with opioid agonists, and risk of a fatal opioid overdose. Methods: Records were obtained for persons with arrests, incarcerations, and community supervision cases related to property/drug crimes in Maryland in 2015–2016 (N = 43,842). Individuals were matched to records in three state databases: admissions to specialty substance use disorder treatment, buprenorphine prescriptions for office-based OUD treatment, and opioid overdose death records. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify correlates of opioid agonist treatment utilization and overdose risk among justice-involved adults who received OUD treatment. Results: Of 43,842 justice-involved adults (80% male), nearly 20% utilized OUD treatment. Of these, 58% received agonist medications. Those with polysubstance use diagnoses or referred to treatment directly by criminal justice sources were least likely to receive medications. Agonist medications reduced odds of fatal overdose by 60%. Conclusions: Opioid agonist treatment was highly protective against overdose among justice-involved individuals receiving treatment in the community, but many still lacked access to this type of care. Policies and interventions to promote the expansion of opioid agonist treatment in community settings that serve justice-involved persons are critical.

Specialty Substance Use Disorder Treatment Admissions Steadily Increased In The Four Years After Medicaid Expansion.

The Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion provided insurance coverage to many low-income adults with substance use disorders, but it is unclear whether this led to more people receiving treatment. We used the Treatment Episode Data Set and a difference-in-differences approach to compare annual rates of specialty treatment admissions in expansion versus nonexpansion states in the period 2010-17. We found that admissions to treatment steadily increased in the four years after Medicaid expansion, with 36percent more people entering treatment by the fourth expansion year in expansion states compared to nonexpansion states. Changes were largest for people entering intensive outpatient programs and those seeking medication treatment for opioid use disorder. The share of admissions paid for by Medicaid increased 23percentage points in expansion states compared to nonexpansion states, largely displacing treatment paid for by state and local governments. The gradual increase in specialty substance use disorder treatment admissions after Medicaid expansion may reflect improving capacity and access to care.

Availability of Medications for the Treatment of Alcohol and Opioid Use Disorder in the USA.

Despite high mortality rates due to opioid overdose and excessive alcohol consumption, medications for the treatment of alcohol and opioid use disorder have not been widely used in the USA. This paper provides an overview of the literature on the availability of alcohol and opioid used disorder medications in the specialty substance use disorder treatment system, other treatment settings and systems, and among providers with a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. We also present the most current data on the availability of alcohol and opioid use disorder medications in the USA. These estimates show steady growth in availability of opioid use disorder medications over the past decade and a decline in availability of alcohol use disorder medications. However, overall use of medications in the USA remains low. In 2017, only 16.3% of specialty treatment programs offered any single medication for alcohol use disorder treatment and 35.5% offered any single medication for opioid use disorder treatment. Availability of buprenorphine-waivered providers has increased significantly since 2002. However, geographic disparities in access to buprenorphine remain. Some of the most promising strategies to increase availability of alcohol and opioid use disorder medications include the following: incorporating substance use disorder training in healthcare education programs, educating the substance use disorder workforce about the benefits of medication treatment, reducing stigma surrounding the use of medications, implementing medications in primary care settings, implementing integrated care models, revising regulations on methadone and buprenorphine, improving health insurance coverage of medications, and developing novel medications for the treatment of substance use disorder.

Technology-Delivered Cognitive-Behavioral Interventions for Alcohol Use: A Meta-Analysis.

Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has long-standing evidence for efficacy in the treatment of alcohol use, yet implementation in clinical practice has been challenging. Delivery of CBT through technology-based platforms, such as web-based programs and mobile applications, has the potential to provide widespread access to this evidence-based intervention. While there have been reviews indicating the efficacy of technology-based delivery of CBT for various psychiatric conditions, none have focused on efficacy for alcohol use. The current meta-analysis was conducted to fill this research gap. Descriptive data were used to characterize the nature of the literature on technology-delivered, CBT-based interventions for alcohol use ("CBT Tech"). Inverse-variance-weighted effect sizes were calculated, and random effects, effect sizes were pooled in 4 subgroups. Fifteen published trials conducted primarily with at-risk or heavy drinkers were identified. Of these studies, 60% explicitly targeted alcohol use moderation. The content of CBT Tech programs varied, ranging from 4 to 62 sessions/exercises, with many programs combining elements of motivational interviewing (47%). With respect to efficacy, CBT Tech as a stand-alone treatment in contrast to a minimal treatment control showed a positive and statistically significant, albeit small effect (g=0.20: 95% CI=0.22, 0.38, kes =5). When CBT Tech was compared to treatment as usual (TAU), effects were nonsignificant. However, when CBT Tech was tested as an addition to TAU, in contrast to TAU only, the effect size was positive, significant (g=0.30: 95% CI=0.10, 0.50, kes =7), and stable over 12-month follow-up. Only 2 studies compared CBT Tech to in-person CBT, and this pooled effect size did not suggest superior efficacy. These results show a benefit for technology-delivered, CBT-based interventions as a stand-alone therapy for heavy drinking or as an addition to usual care in specialty substance use settings.

Referral to Treatment After Positive Screens for Unhealthy Drug Use in an Outpatient Veterans Administration Setting.

To measure the rates and predictors of clinician recommendation for follow-up after a positive screen for unhealthy drug use, in a context of mandatory routine screening. To measure response to clinician recommendations and identification of new drug use diagnoses. Data are from a Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical center that introduced mandatory routine screening for unhealthy drug use in outpatient primary care and mental health settings, using a validated single question. This study analyzed VHA electronic health records data for patients who screened positive for unhealthy drug use (n = 570) and estimated logistic regression models to identify the predictors of receiving a recommendation for any follow-up and for specialty substance use disorder (SUD) treatment. Bivariate tests were used for other analyses. Among patients who screened positive for unhealthy drug use, 66% received no recommendation to return to primary care or another setting from the screening clinician. Further, among the 23% of patients who received a recommendation to visit specialty SUD treatment, only 25% completed the visit within 60 days. Six percent of all positive screens both received a referral to specialty SUD treatment and acted upon it. In the context of mandatory drug use screening using a single item, rates of clinician action and patient receipt of care appeared low. Improved follow-up will require health systems to provide more supports for clinicians and patients at each of the stages from positive screen to attending the follow-up appointment.