Substance Use Disorder Treatment Providers Research Articles

Services for perinatal patients with opioid use disorder: a comprehensive Baltimore City-wide 2023 assessment

BackgroundOverdose is a leading cause of maternal mortality; in response, maternal mortality review committees have recommended expanding substance use disorder (SUD) screening, improving collaboration between obstetric and SUD treatment providers, and reducing fragmentation in systems of care. We undertook an analysis of the perinatal SUD treatment landscape in Baltimore, Maryland in order to identify barriers to treatment engagement during pregnancy and the postpartum period and guide system improvement efforts.MethodsWe conducted a survey of seven birthing hospitals, 31 prenatal care practices, and 108 SUD treatment providers in Baltimore from April-June 2023. Organizations were asked to quantify care for perinatal patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) as well as about screening, service availability, referral practices, and support needed to improve care.Results61% of the 145 contacted organizations responded. Birthing hospitals reported caring for pregnant persons with OUD with greater frequency than prenatal care practices or SUD treatment programs. Most birthing hospitals and prenatal care practices reported screening for OUD at intake, but the minority reported using validated tools. Service availability varied by type of organization and type of service. In general, prenatal care practices offered the fewest number of SUD-related services. Most SUD treatment programs that offered buprenorphine or methadone to the general population also offered these medications to pregnant patients. Withdrawal management for comorbid alcohol/benzodiazepine use disorders during pregnancy was more limited. The majority of birthing hospitals and prenatal care practices reported offering neither direct naloxone distribution nor prescriptions. Few SUD treatment programs offered tailored services for perinatal patients or for parents of young children, and many programs do not permit children onsite. Respondents reported high levels of interest in education and consultative support on SUD treatment in pregnancy within obstetric settings and on pregnancy-related medical concerns within SUD programs.ConclusionsThis project provides a comprehensive picture of services available for treatment of perinatal OUD in a major US city. Results have served as a guide for ongoing citywide system improvement efforts by our project team and offer a model for other jurisdictions hoping to strengthen services for perinatal OUD and reduce maternal mortality.

Characterizing Multisystem Barriers to Women's Residential SUD Treatment: A Multisite Qualitative Analysis in Los Angeles.

Residential substance use disorder (SUD) treatment programs are challenged by the differing values of the problem-solving court (PSC) and child welfare (CW) systems, along with communication barriers between staff. This study aimed to understand, from the viewpoints of SUD treatment providers, how divergent values and communication barriers adversely affect women's residential SUD treatment. We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with 18 SUD treatment clinicians and six directors from four women's residential SUD treatment programs. Using a thematic analysis framework, we identified salient themes across specified codes. Analysis revealed six main themes, suggesting differing values and communication barriers across the SUD, PSC, and CW systems adversely affect the provision of SUD treatment. For differing values, three main themes emerged: (a) unaddressed trauma and fear of mental health treatment seeking; (b) perceptions of mothers with a SUD; and (c) the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) timeline as a barrier to SUD treatment provision. For communication barriers, three themes emerged: (a) inadequate communication and responsiveness with PSC and CW systems adversely affect treatment coordination, induce patient stress, and treatment disengagement; (b) lack of PSC and CW communication regarding child visitation planning adversely affects treatment motivation and retention; and (c) competing ASFA, PSC, and CW priorities and inadequate cross-system communication adversely affect treatment planning. Treatment providers face significant barriers in providing effective treatment to women simultaneously involved in the CW and PSC systems. Aligning values and addressing communication barriers, changes in policy, and enhanced cross-system training are crucial. Additionally, it is essential to reevaluate the ASFA timeline to align with the long-term treatment needs of mothers with a SUD. Further research should explore the viewpoints of patients, CW, and PSC staff to gain deeper insights into these SUD treatment barriers.

Rural and urban clinician views on COVID-19’s impact on substance use treatment for individuals on community supervision in Kentucky

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic produced system-level changes within the criminal legal system and community-based substance use disorder (SUD) treatment system with impacts on recovery efforts. This study examines rural and urban clinicians’ perspectives of COVID-19 on SUD treatment delivery for people on community supervision.MethodsVirtual qualitative interviews were conducted between April and October 2020 with 25 community supervision clinicians employed by Kentucky’s Department of Corrections (DOC), who conduct assessments and facilitate community-based treatment linkages for individuals on probation or parole. Transcripts were analyzed in NVivo using directed content analysis methods.ResultsClinicians were predominantly white (92%) and female (88%) with an average of over 9 years working in the SUD treatment field and 4.6 years in their current job. Four COVID-19 themes were identified by both rural and urban clinicians including: (1) telehealth increases the modes of communication, but (2) also creates paperwork and technological challenges, (3) telehealth requires more effort for inter/intra-agency collaboration, and (4) it limits client information (e.g., no urine drug screens). Two additional rural-specific themes emerged related to COVID-19: (5) increasing telehealth options removes SUD treatment transportation barriers and (6) requires flexibility with programmatic requirements for rural clients.ConclusionsFindings indicate the need for community-based SUD treatment providers approved or contracted by DOC to support and train clients to access technology and improve information-sharing with community supervision officers. A positive lesson learned from COVID-19 transitions was a reduction in costly travel for rural clients, allowing for greater engagement and treatment adherence. Telehealth should continue to be included within the SUD continuum of care, especially to promote equitable services for individuals from rural areas.

Cognitive remediation in residential substance use treatment: A randomized stepped-wedge trial

ABSTRACT Executive dysfunction is common in individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) and presents a barrier to treatment engagement. The study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of cognitive remediation (CR) for improving executive functioning and treatment retention in patients with SUD, using a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. The sample included 527 adults enrolled across ten residential SUD treatment providers in NSW, Australia. The intervention consisted of 12 hours of CR delivered over six weeks in a group format. The comparator was treatment-as-usual (TAU). Primary outcomes included self-reported executive functioning and proportion of treatment completed (PoTC), measured as the number of days in treatment divided by the planned treatment duration. Intention-to-treat analysis did not find significant differences for self-reported executive functioning (mean difference = −2.49, 95%CI [−5.07, 0.09], p = .059) or PoTC (adjusted mean ratio = 1.09, 95%CI [0.88, 1.36], p = .442). Due to high dropout from the intention-to-treat sample (56%) a post-hoc analysis was conducted using a per-protocol approach, in which CR was associated with improved self-reported executive functioning (mean difference = −3.33, 95%CI [−6.10, −0.57], p = .019) and improved likelihood of treatment graduation (adjusted odds ratio = 2.43, 95%CI [1.43, 4.11], p < .001). More research is required to develop a CR approach that results in service-wide treatment effectiveness.

Smoking Policies of Outpatient and Residential Substance Use Disorder Treatment Facilities in the United States.

Tobacco use is associated with morbidity and mortality. Many individuals who present to treatment facilities with substance use disorders (SUDs) other than tobacco use disorder also smoke cigarettes or have a concomitant tobacco use disorder. Despite high rates of smoking among those with an SUD, and numerous demonstrated benefits of comprehensive SUD treatment for tobacco use in addition to co-occurring SUDs, not all facilities address the treatment of comorbid tobacco use disorder. In addition, facilities vary widely in terms of tobacco use policies on campus. This study examined SUD facility smoking policies in a national sample of N = 16,623 SUD treatment providers in the United States in 2021. Most facilities with outpatient treatment (52.1%) and facilities with residential treatment (67.8%) had a smoking policy that permitted smoking in designated outdoor area(s). A multinomial logistic regression model found that among facilities with outpatient treatment (n = 13,778), those located in a state with laws requiring tobacco free grounds at SUD facilities, those with tobacco screening/education/counseling services, and those with nicotine pharmacotherapy were less likely to have an unrestrictive tobacco smoking policy. Among facilities with residential treatment (n = 3449), those with tobacco screening/education/counseling services were less likely to have an unrestrictive tobacco smoking policy. There is variability in smoking policies and tobacco use treatment options in SUD treatment facilities across the United States. Since tobacco use is associated with negative biomedical outcomes, more should be done to ensure that SUD treatment also focuses on reducing the harms of tobacco use.

“They just looked at me like I was human”: The experiences of parenting women and providers with substance use disorder treatment

BackgroundThe current US addiction treatment system does not effectively meet the needs of pregnant and parenting women with substance use disorder (SUD). The aim of this research was to identify barriers and facilitators to engagement and retention in SUD residential treatment for pregnant and parenting women. This research was part of a co-design process to collaboratively create a more patient-centered long-term residential program. Design and methodsThe study conducted semi-structured individual interviews with both parenting women with lived experience (WWLE) in residential SUD treatment and SUD treatment providers. Interviews aimed to elicit participants' experiences either receiving or providing care. The study team analyzed data in NVivo-12 using a deductive codebook based on the six principles of trauma informed care (TIC). ResultsWe conducted a total of 32 interviews (WWLE =13, SUD providers =19). The study identified four major themes: 1) peer relationships provide inspiration and diminish shame; 2) providing individuals safe space to stumble in recovery creates opportunities for growth and builds self-efficacy; 3) reasonable, clear boundaries create a structured, protective environment for early recovery; 4) nonjudgmental connections facilitate engagement and build trust. We identified small pivotal moments along the continuum of care that showed how the elements in the four themes enhanced engagement and retention in treatment. These interactions, along the care continuum, are either structural (workflow process) or relational (interpersonal). ConclusionThis research increases understanding of the interplay of the structural and relational barriers and facilitators to engagement and retention in treatment. These seemingly minor positive or negative interactions along the care continuum are pivotal to fully operationalizing TIC and optimizing women's engagement in treatment. Improvement strategies that integrate the voices of WWLE and collaboratively co-design a more patient-centered system are critical steps to improving engagement in SUD treatment and more equitable SUD treatment services.

Exploring the Impact of External Facilitation Using Evidence-Based Implementation Strategies for Increasing Motivational Interviewing Capacity Among Outpatient Substance Use Disorder (SUD) Treatment Providers.

The large majority of individuals who access substance use disorders (SUD) treatment do not receive evidence-based care. Little attention has been paid to the notion that the scale-up of evidence-based practices (EBPs) has been limited in large part due to a weakness in the "distribution system" for bringing new innovations to the attention of practitioners and into practice settings. This study explores the impact of the Training and Practice Implementation Institute (TPII; funded by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene), an intensive technical assistance initiative that offers external facilitation to outpatient SUD treatment providers via the incorporation of multiple evidence-based implementation strategies to enhance the practice of motivational interviewing (MI). Findings from this study show that staff completed a large majority (86%) of required training/technical assistance (TTA) activities across the 9-month implementation period, demonstrating a high level of engagement among staff and the feasibility of externally facilitated intensive TTA delivered to community-based organizations for the purpose of enhancing implementation of MI for SUDs. Results also show statistically significant improvements in the delivery of MI's technical components among staff, though did not reveal corresponding improvements in the delivery of MI's relational components. An understanding of the potential return on investment associated with externally facilitated TA, offers organizations an opportunity to inform the allocation of limited resources to areas where they will have the greatest impact and ultimately improve the quality and efficacy of services.

An unexplored equity factor: differential beliefs and attitudes toward contingency management by providers’ ethnicity

BackgroundAlthough considered one of the most effective interventions for substance use disorders (SUD), the widespread implementation of contingency management (CM) has remained limited. In more recent years there has been surge in the implementation of CM to address increasing rates of substance use. Prior studies at the provider-level have explored beliefs about CM among SUD treatment providers and have tailored implementation strategies based on identified barriers and training needs, to promote implementation of CM. However, there have been no implementation strategies that have actively sought to identify or address potential differences in the beliefs about CM that could be influenced by the cultural background (e.g., ethnicity) of treatment providers. To address this knowledge gap, we examined beliefs about CM among a sample of inpatient and outpatient SUD treatment providers.MethodsA cross-sectional survey of SUD treatment providers was completed by 143 respondents. The survey asked respondents about their attitudes toward CM using the Contingency Management Beliefs Questionnaire (CMBQ). Linear mixed models examined the effect of ethnicity (non-Hispanic White and Hispanic) on CMBQ subscale (general barriers, training-related barriers, CM positive-statements) scores.ResultsFifty-nine percent of respondents to the CMBQ self-identified as non-Hispanic White and 41% as Hispanic. Findings revealed that treatment providers who identified as Hispanic had significantly higher scores on the general barriers (p < .001) and training-related barriers (p = .020) subscales compared to the non-Hispanic White treatment providers. Post-hoc analyses identified differences in the endorsement of specific individual scale items on the general barriers (e.g., CM interventions create extra work for me) and training-related (e.g., I want more training before implementing CM) subscales.ConclusionsDissemination and implementation strategies for CM need to consider equity-related factors at the provider-level that may be associated with the adoption and uptake of CM.

“The new normal has become a nonstop crisis”: a qualitative study of burnout among Philadelphia’s harm reduction and substance use disorder treatment workers during the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic worsened the ongoing overdose crisis in the United States (US) and caused significant mental health strain and burnout among health care workers (HCW). Harm reduction, overdose prevention, and substance use disorder (SUD) workers may be especially impacted due to underfunding, resources shortages, and chaotic working environments. Existing research on HCW burnout primarily focuses on licensed HCWs in traditional environments and fails to account for the unique experiences of harm reduction workers, community organizers, and SUD treatment clinicians.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative secondary analysis descriptive study of 30 Philadelphia-based harm reduction workers, community organizers, and SUD treatment clinicians about their experiences working in their roles during the COVID-19 pandemic in July–August 2020. Our analysis was guided by Shanafelt and Noseworthy’s model of key drivers of burnout and engagement. We aimed to assess the applicability of this model to the experiences of SUD and harm reduction workers in non-traditional settings.ResultsWe deductively coded our data in alignment with Shanafelt and Noseworthy’s key drivers of burnout and engagement: (1) workload and job demands, (2) meaning in work, (3) control and flexibility, (4) work-life integration, (5) organizational culture and values, (6) efficiency and resources and (7) social support and community at work. While Shanafelt and Noseworthy’s model broadly encompassed the experiences of our participants, it did not fully account for their concerns about safety at work, lack of control over the work environment, and experiences of task-shifting.ConclusionsBurnout among healthcare providers is receiving increasing attention nationally. Much of this coverage and the existing research have focused on workers in traditional healthcare spaces and often do not consider the experiences of community-based SUD treatment, overdose prevention, and harm reduction providers. Our findings indicate a gap in existing frameworks for burnout and a need for models that encompass the full range of the harm reduction, overdose prevention, and SUD treatment workforce. As the US overdose crisis continues, it is vital that we address and mitigate experiences of burnout among harm reduction workers, community organizers, and SUD treatment clinicians to protect their wellbeing and to ensure the sustainability of their invaluable work.

COVID 19\u2014impact on substance use treatment utilization and provision in South Africa

BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted people with substance use disorders (SUDs) worldwide. The aim of this study was to explore, changes in the number of SUD treatment episodes provided during the height of the pandemic and, SUD treatment providers’ perceptions of the impact of COVID-19-related restrictions on people with SUDs and the delivery of SUD treatment services in South Africa.MethodsWe used administrative data collected as part of the South African Community Epidemiology Network on Drug Use (SACENDU) project to assess whether the number of treatment episodes changed during the height of COVID-19 restrictions. We used data from an online survey of SUD treatment providers to assess providers’ perceptions of the impact of COVID-19 on SUD treatment delivery. Eight seven SUD facilities were recruited to participate in the online survey.ResultsSixty-three organisations (out of a total of 86) participated in the survey, yielding a 73.2% response rate. About half (n = 30; 47.6%) of the sample thought the need for SUD treatment had remained the same or had increased during the COVID-19 lockdown. Half the sample (n = 32; 50.7%) reported decreased availability of SUD services during COVID-19 lockdowns. Participants believed that the lack of services during COVID-19 lockdown impacted negatively on patients that were enrolled in their programmes and on individuals who wished to access the service. Furthermore, changes in service provision seemed to increase patients’ anxiety, exacerbate pre-existing mental health problems and in some cases were thought to precipitate relapse. In addition, patient disengagement and attrition from treatment were thought to have increased during this period. Whilst 47.6% (n = 30) of providers agreed with the value of the alcohol ban, 23.8% (n = 15) of providers thought it had unintended negative consequences.ConclusionBased on the findings it is evident that SUD treatment services in South Africa have been significantly affected during the COVID-19 pandemic and more severely during the onset of the pandemic. Together with service providers, more effective ways should be sought on how to feasibly expand access to SUD treatment for all South Africans and enhance the country’s preparedness for future health emergencies.

Determinants of Relapse and Opportunities for Growth: Perspectives on Substance Use among American Indian Community Members

ABSTRACT Resulting from generations of historical oppression and systemic racism, American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities experience serious health disparities associated with substance use disorders (SUDs). As part of a longstanding community-based participatory research intervention development project, our partnership of academic and community co-researchers conducted seven focus groups (N = 35) to understand community stakeholders’ perspectives on substance use, relapse, and recovery on a rural AI reservation. Participants included cultural leaders (n = 10), SUD treatment providers (n = 5), people with SUD (n = 10), and affected family members (n = 10). Cultural leaders viewed relapse as symptomatic of historical oppression, whereas other stakeholder groups attributed relapse to individual and interpersonal risk factors such as peer influence, lack of family support, and traumatic stress. All participant groups recognized relapse as a normative aspect of recovering from SUD that presents new opportunities for learning and growth. Specifically, regaining humility, learning to ask for help, recognizing one’s triggers, and strengthening commitment to change were identified as learning outcomes for people with SUD. For family members, relapse provided the opportunity to practice forgiveness and compassion, two important cultural values. All groups emphasized the importance of grounding interventions in cultural values and traditions.

Comparative outcomes for Black children served by the Sobriety Treatment and Recovery Teams program for families with parental substance abuse and child maltreatment

IntroductionAn urgent need exists for child welfare and substance use disorder (SUD) interventions that safely preserve Black families, engage parents in treatment services, and improve child and parent outcomes. The Title IV-E Prevention Services Clearinghouse rated The Sobriety Treatment and Recovery Teams (START) as a promising practice for families with parental substance use and child maltreatment. This study is the first to test the effects of START on Black families. MethodsThis study compared child welfare and parent outcomes for 894 children and their 567 primary parents in three groups: Black children served by START, Black children served in treatment as usual (TAU), and White children served in START. This was a quasi-experimental study using a propensity score matched dataset of START-served children to TAU children. Comparisons included placement in state custody and repeat child abuse or neglect (CA/N) during the intervention period, and at 12 months post-intervention. Generalized linear models accounted for the effects of clustering and unbalanced covariates on outcomes. ResultsIn this study, 51.8% of children were neonates or infants at the CPS report. At 12-months post-intervention, 80.6% of Black children served by START, but only 56.0% of Black children in TAU, remained free of both placement in state custody and CA/N (p < .001, OR = 3.27, 95% CI [2.14, 4.98]); these effects held after controlling for family clusters. Black and White families in START received equal SUD treatment and community-based services. For START-served families, parental use of opioids (p = .005, OR = 3.52, 95% CI [1.46, 8.48]) and mental health issues (p = .002, OR = 1.90, 95% CI [1.27, 2.86]), rather than race, predicted child placement in state custody. Parent mental health issues or opioid use doubled or quadrupled, respectively, the odds of failing to achieve early recovery by case closure. ConclusionsSTART is a potent intervention, co-implemented with SUD treatment providers, that kept Black children safely with their families through the intervention and 12-months post-intervention periods. Scaling up effective programs, like START, that align with the goals of the Family First Prevention Services Act might reduce racial disparities and improve child welfare and SUD treatment outcomes.

Suicide safer care in behavioral health settings: A comparative analysis of perceptions, training completion, and practice between mental health and substance use disorder treatment providers

BackgroundDespite prevention and treatment efforts, opioid overdose deaths continue to rise in the United States and totaled 46,802 in 2018. This public health crisis is closely linked with suicide, with those who misuse opioids at six times the risk of death by suicide. Suicide prevention in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment may be a critical step in saving lives and promoting recovery among those at risk for opioid overdose. MethodsWe distributed an electronic survey to clinicians in mental health and SUD treatment in nine health systems across New York State from November 2018 to January 2019. The goal of the survey was to assess attitudes, perceptions, practice, and training needs among SUD treatment providers and how they differ from those of mental health providers. ResultsA total of 633 clinicians responded to the survey (62.4% response rate). Seventy-one percent of SUD providers reported working with a client who attempted suicide. Even so, less than half of SUD providers reported routinely screening new (48.9%) or existing patients (25.6%) for suicidal thoughts/behaviors; overall, 28.4% of SUD providers reported low levels of action to address suicide risk, compared to 9.0% of mental health providers (p < 0.001). Perceived self-efficacy and effectiveness at reducing a patient's risk of suicide and training completion were strongly associated with routine delivery of suicide safer care in adjusted logistic regression models. ConclusionsThe results of this study identify key areas for targeted training and technical assistance to increase the provision of quality suicide safer care in SUD treatment.

Do expansions in adolescent access to public insurance affect the decisions of substance use disorder treatment providers?

We apply a mixed-payer economy model to study the effects of changes in the generosity of children’s public health insurance programs – measured by Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program income thresholds – on substance use disorder (SUD) treatment provider behavior. Using government data on specialty SUD treatment providers over the period 1997–2011 combined with a two-way fixed-effects model and local event study, we show that increases in the generosity of children’s public health insurance induce providers to participate in some, but not all, public markets. Our effects appear to be driven by non-profit and government providers. Non-profit providers also appear to increase treatment quantity slightly in response to coverage expansions.

Addressing Barriers to On-site HIV and HCV Testing Services in Methadone Maintenance Treatment Programs in the United States: Findings From a National Multisite Qualitative Study.

Few substance use disorder (SUD) treatment programs provide on-site human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and/or hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing, despite evidence that these tests are cost-effective. To understand how methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) programs that offer on-site HIV/HCV testing have integrated testing services, and the challenges related to offering on-site HIV/HCV testing. We used the 2014 National Drug Abuse Treatment System Survey to identify outpatient SUD treatment programs that reported offering on-site HIV/HCV testing to 75% or more of their clients. We stratified the sample to identify programs based on combinations of funding source, type of drug treatment offered, and Medicaid-managed care arrangements. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with leadership and staff in 2017-2018 using a directed content analysis approach to identify dominant themes. Seven MMT programs located in 6 states in the United States. Fifteen leadership and staff from 7 MMT programs with on-site HIV/HCV testing. Themes related to integration of on-site HIV/HCV testing. Methadone maintenance treatment programs identified 3 domains related to the integration of HIV/HCV testing on-site at MMT programs: (1) payment and billing, (2) internal and external stakeholders, and (3) medical and SUD treatment coordination. Programs identified the absence of state policies that facilitate medical billing and inconsistent grant funding as major barriers. Testing availability was limited by the frequency at which external organizations could provide services on-site, the reliability of those external relationships, and MMT staffing. Poor electronic health record systems and privacy policies that prevent medical information sharing between medical and SUD treatment providers also limited effective care coordination. Effective and sustainable integration of on-site HIV/HCV testing by MMT programs in the United States will require more consistent funding, improved billing options, technical assistance, electronic health record system enhancement and coordination, and policy changes related to privacy.

Examining trends in substance use disorder capacity and service delivery by Health Resources and Services Administration-funded health centers: A time series regression analysis.

The opioid epidemic and subsequent mortality is a national concern in the U.S. The burden of this problem is disproportionately high among low-income and uninsured populations who are more likely to experience unmet need for substance use services. We assessed the impact of two Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) substance use disorder (SUD) service capacity grants on SUD staffing and service use in HRSA -funded health centers (HCs). We conducted cross-sectional analyses of the Uniform Data System (UDS) from 2010 to 2017 to assess HC (n = 1,341) trends in capacity measured by supply of SUD and medication-assisted treatment (MAT) providers, utilization of SUD and MAT services, and panel size and visit ratio measured by the number of patients seen and visits delivered by SUD and MAT providers. We merged mortality and national survey data to incorporate SUD mortality and SUD treatment services availability, respectively. From 2010 to 2015, 20% of HC organizations had any SUD staff, had an average of one full-time equivalent SUD employee, and did not report an increase in SUD patients or SUD services. SUD capacity grew significantly in 2016 (43%) and 2017 (22%). MAT capacity growth was measured only in 2016 and 2017 and grew by 29% between those years. Receipt of both supplementary grants increased the probability of any SUD capacity by 35% (95% CI: 26%, 44%) and service use, but decreased the probability of SUD visit ratio by 680 visits (95% CI: -1,013, -347), compared to not receiving grants. The significant growth in HC specialized SUD capacity is likely due to supplemental SUD-specific HRSA grants and may vary by structure of grants. Expanding SUD capacity in HCs is an important step in increasing SUD access for low income and uninsured populations broadly and for patients of these organizations.

ONDCP: SUD treatment providers need PPE

Last month, the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) issued a “Dear Colleagues” letter calling on personal protective equipment (PPE) suppliers to honor requests from substance use disorder (SUD) treatment providers. “Treatment providers and all others associated with maintaining this vital sector of healthcare serve in a critical capacity and will require personal protective equipment (PPE) during unavoidable face‐to‐face patient interactions,” wrote James W. Carroll, ONDCP director, in the April 23 letter.

Kent, leaving OASAS, reflects on high points and challenges

Rob Kent, longtime general counsel for the New York Office of Addiction Services and Supports (OASAS), is leaving April 1 for a new position with the American Association of Orthodontists in St. Louis. A masterful negotiator with a progressive view toward substance use disorders (SUDs), which made him beloved by treatment providers and harm reductionists alike, Kent also knew and could articulately discuss nuances of legal and regulatory issues affecting the state's SUD treatment providers. We talked to him last week to get his perspective on the high points and challenges of his career at OASAS, which he joined in 2007; before then, he was with the state's Office of Mental Health (OMH).

How are Substance Use Disorder Treatment Programs Adjusting to Value-Based Payment? A Statewide Qualitative Study.

Healthcare systems are implementing value-based payment (VBP) arrangements in efforts to incentivize cost-effective, high quality of care. These arrangements represent a major shift for substance use disorder (SUD) treatment providers who may need to make changes to their clinical and business operations to meet new demands for quality under value-based contracts. This qualitative study was conducted in the context of New York State’s efforts to implement VBP among SUD treatment providers to understand their experiences, challenges, and needs. Five focus groups were conducted across the State with a total of 68 treatment professionals. Content analysis was conducted and five themes emerged. First, competing demands, limited workforce and technology infrastructure, and perceived lack of information were leading to overwhelmed administrators. Second, confusion and financial fear was being driven by the need for new clinical roles, business practices, and external partnerships. Third, providers were undertaking a number of measures to address workforce needs. Fourth, providers were building new business models and clinical practices. Fifth, providers desired more support and information. As VBP models are being adopted, healthcare systems should identify ways to mitigate challenges and support SUD treatment providers that may have limited resources to address complex workforce, client, and infrastructure needs.

In Case You Haven't Heard…

Georgia's H.B. 481, which would make any fetus with a heartbeat a person (starting at six weeks), has a partner: the recognition of any fetus as a “dependent minor.” This has huge ramifications for substance use disorder (SUD) treatment. The ever vigilant H. Westley Clark, M.D., J.D., reminded us that this means a pregnant woman who presents for SUD treatment might have to be reported to child welfare and/or the police, whether or not she wants to carry the pregnancy to term. “Thus, merely discovering that she is pregnant at 4 weeks — still undecided that she wants to carry the pregnancy to term or not — makes her a ‘child abuser,’ even though Georgia law would allow for an abortion until six weeks.” SUD treatment providers in the state “would be caught up in a conundrum of significant proportions,” Clark told us. “Can the existing 42 CFR Part 2 protect a treatment‐seeking pregnant woman from sanctions? Under the old laws, yes, but under the new laws, I don't think so. This is something about which we should be thinking.”