Use Of Buprenorphine Research Articles

Monitoring medication and illicit drug consumption in a prison by wastewater-based epidemiology: Impact of COVID-19 restrictions

Drug consumption in prisons is a concern for the safety of incarcerated people and staff. Typically, drug use prevalence in prisons is estimated through urinalysis and intelligence operations, which can be intrusive and stressful. An alternative approach, wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE), was used in this study to estimate the consumption of licit and illicit drugs for the entire population of a prison in Australia. Wastewater samples were collected from March to December 2020, covering periods of no restrictions and periods when prison access was restricted to prevent the transmission of COVID-19. Target biomarkers were analysed by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The average consumption of common illicit drugs (MDMA, methamphetamine and cocaine) over the sampling period in the prison (0.5 – 4.5 mg/1000 people/day) was two to three orders of magnitude lower than in the community population (254 – 1000 mg/1000 people/day). Comparison of WBE estimates against pharmacy dispensing data suggested potential illicit buprenorphine consumption at the prison. Methamphetamine and buprenorphine use decreased when no visitors were allowed (18% - 72% decrease for methamphetamine; about half decrease for buprenorphine) and increased once these restrictions were eased (22% - 39% increase for methamphetamine; 44% - 67% increase for buprenorphine). The changes in drug use may be attributed in part to a reduction of drug trafficking into the prison from visitors or non-essential staffs and in part to the reduced contribution of urine from staff who used toilets within the prison. This study provided useful information on the scale of illicit drug use and extra-medical use of licit drugs in prison, and its changes under different security conditions.

An analysis of patterns of distribution of buprenorphine in the United States using ARCOS, Medicaid, and Medicare databases.

Opioid overdose remains a problem in the United States despite pharmacotherapies, such as buprenorphine, in the treatment of opioid use disorder. This study characterized changes in buprenorphine use. Using the Drug Enforcement Administration's ARCOS, Medicaid, and Medicare claims databases, patterns in buprenorphine usage in the United States from 2018 to 2020 were analyzed by examining percentage changes in total grams distributed and changes in grams per 100 K people in year-to-year usage based on ZIP code and state levels. For ARCOS from 2018 to 2019 and 2019 to 2020, total buprenorphine distribution in grams increased by 16.2% and 12.6%, respectively. South Dakota showed the largest statewide percentage increase in both 2018-2019 (66.1%) and 2019-2020 (36.7%). From 2018 to 2019, the ZIP codes ND-577 (156.4%) and VA-222 (-82.1%) had the largest and smallest percentage changes, respectively. From 2019 to 2020, CA-932 (250.2%) and IL-603 (-36.8%) were the largest and smallest, respectively. In both 2018-2019 and 2019-2020, PA-191 had the second highest increase in grams per 100K while OH-452 was the only ZIP code to remain in the top three largest decreases in grams per 100K in both periods. Among Medicaid patients in 2018, there was a nearly 2000-fold difference in prescriptions per 100k Medicaid enrollees between Kentucky (12 075) and Nebraska (6). Among Medicare enrollees in 2018, family medicine physicians and other primary care providers were the top buprenorphine prescribers. This study not only identified overall increases in buprenorphine availability but also pronounced state-level differences. Such geographic analysis can be used to discern which public policies and regional factors impact buprenorphine access.

Attitudes and beliefs about Vermont’s 2021 buprenorphine decriminalization law among residents who use illicit opioids

BackgroundIn July 2021, Vermont removed all criminal penalties for possessing 224mg or less of buprenorphine. MethodsVermont residents (N=474) who used illicit opioid drugs or received treatment for opioid use disorder in the past 90 days were recruited for a mixed-methods survey on the health and criminal legal effects of decriminalization. Topics assessed included: motivations for using non-prescribed buprenorphine, awareness of and support for decriminalization, and criminal legal system experiences involving buprenorphine. We examined the frequencies of quantitative measures and qualitatively summarized themes from free-response questions. ResultsThree-quarters of respondents (76%) reported lifetime use of non-prescribed buprenorphine. 80% supported decriminalization, but only 28% were aware buprenorphine was decriminalized in Vermont. Respondents described using non-prescribed buprenorphine to alleviate withdrawal symptoms and avoid use of other illicit drugs. 18% had been arrested while in buprenorphine, with non-White respondents significantly more likely to report such arrests (15% v 33%, p<0.001). ConclusionDecriminalization of buprenorphine may reduce unnecessary criminal legal system involvement, but its health impact was limited by low awareness at the time of our study.

Evaluation of Use of Intravenous Buprenorphine for Cancer Pain at a Large Academic Medical Center

Evaluation of Use of Intravenous Buprenorphine for Cancer Pain at a Large Academic Medical Center

Depression and Suicidal Ideation among Patients Receiving Opioid Maintenance Treatments Considering Cognitive Flexibility.

Objective: Cognitive flexibility is associated with psychiatric disorders. Drug addicts experience more psychiatric disorders. This research aimed to examine depression and suicidal ideation among those receiving opioid maintenance treatment (OMT), taking into account the mediating role of cognitive flexibility. Method : This cross-sectional research was conducted on patients who were enrolled in the OMT program in Semnan in 2021 and abstained from opioid use for at least one year. 126 participants (115 males and 11 females) were randomly selected from among patients in three therapeutic groups (42 from each of the methadone, buprenorphine, and opium tincture groups). The main data collection tools were the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (BSSI), Cognitive Flexibility Inventory (CFI), and Beck Depression Scale (BDI-II). Data analysis was done through logistic regression models. Results: Correlation analysis between depression scores, suicidal ideation, and cognitive flexibility showed a significant correlation between each of them. Adjusting for the type of treatment, the increase in cognitive flexibility was associated with a decreasing chance of depression (odds ratio [OR] = 0.87; 95% CI [0.82, 0.92]), and the use of buprenorphine (OR = 15.1) and opium tincture (OR = 9.3), compared to methadone, were associated with a depression increase. Yet, multivariate analysis did not show an independent and significant association between cognitive flexibility and the risk of suicide. Conclusion: Based on the results, patients receiving maintenance treatments are in different conditions in terms of depression and suicide, and psychological flexibility is in correlation with depression and suicidal thinking and behavior in them. This suggests that these patients seem to benefit from cognitive training, at least in reducing their depression.

Postoperative buprenorphine continuation in stabilized buprenorphine patients: A population cohort study.

Sudden discontinuation of buprenorphine in the treatment of opioid use disorder can increase the risk of subsequent relapse and overdose. Little is known about buprenorphine use in the perioperative period. The aim of this study was to determine the rate of buprenorphine continuation after hospital discharge following surgery and factors associated with continuation. A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative data from Ontario, Canada, between 2012 and 2018. The cohort included individuals on continuous buprenorphine prior to surgery. Logistic regression modeling was used to estimate the association of buprenorphine continuation with demographic, opioid agonist treatment, surgical and health service use factors. Administrative databases from Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) were used, which capture the Ontario, Canada, population. The data sets describe physician billing, monitoring of controlled substances and hospital discharges. Adults (≥ 18 years, n = 2176) had received a buprenorphine/naloxone product continuously for at least 60 days for the treatment of opioid use disorder and subsequently underwent a surgical procedure. Continuation (versus discontinuation) of buprenorphine prescriptions in the 14 days after surgical discharge was recommended. Exposures included demographic, comorbidity, opioid agonist treatment, surgical and health service use characteristics. About 176 (8.1%) of the 2176 patients discontinued buprenorphine after surgery. Inpatient surgery (versus ambulatory) was associated with reduced odds of continuation, with an unadjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.17 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.12-0.25] and an adjusted OR of 0.16 (95% CI = 0.11-0.23) after accounting for age, sex, rural residence, neighborhood income quintile, Charlson comorbidity index, psychiatric hospitalizations in the past 5 years and recent dispensed supply of buprenorphine (number needed to harm of 6.6). In Ontario, Canada, from 2012 to 2018, most patients receiving continuous preoperative buprenorphine therapy continued buprenorphine use after surgery. Inpatient surgery was a strong predictor of discontinuation compared with ambulatory procedures.

Buprenorphine Continuation During Critical Illness Associated With Decreased Inpatient Opioid Use in Individuals Maintained on Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder in a Retrospective Study.

The number of patients maintained on buprenorphine is steadily increasing. To date, no study has reported buprenorphine management practices for these patients during critical illness, nor its relationship with supplemental full-agonist opioid administration during their hospital stay. In this single-center retrospective study, we have explored the incidence of buprenorphine continuation during critical illness among patients receiving buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder. Additionally, we investigated the relationship between nonbuprenorphine opioid exposure and buprenorphine administration during the intensive care unit (ICU) and post-ICU phases of care. Our study included adults maintained on buprenorphine for opioid use disorder admitted to the ICU between December 1, 2014, and May 31, 2019. Nonbuprenorphine, full agonist opioid doses were converted to fentanyl equivalents (FEs). Fifty-one (44%) patients received buprenorphine during the ICU phase of care, with an average dose of 8 (8-12) mg/day. During the post-ICU phase of care, 68 (62%) received buprenorphine, with an average dose of 10 (7-14) mg/day. Lack of mechanical ventilation and acetaminophen use were also associated with buprenorphine use. Full agonist opioid use was more frequent on days when buprenorphine was not given (odds ratio [OR], 6.2 [95% CI, 2.3-16.4]; P<.001). Additionally, the average cumulative dose of opioids given on nonbuprenorphine administration days was significantly higher both in the ICU (OR, 1803 [95% CI, 1271-2553] vs OR, 327 [95% CI, 152-708] FEs/day; P<0.001) and after ICU discharge (OR, 1476 [95% CI, 962-2265] vs OR, 238 [95% CI, 150-377] FEs/day; P<.001). Given these findings, buprenorphine continuation during critical illness should be considered, as it is associated with significantly decreased full agonist opioid use.

Prescription drug dependence with and without concurrent illicit drug use: a multicenter cross-sectional survey among an addiction treatment seeking population.

Dependence on prescription drugs and illicit drugs imposes a global health and social burden. Despite accumulating evidence of prescription drugs and illicit drugs dependence, none of the systematized studies has explored the magnitude of this problem in Pakistan. The aim is to investigate the extent and associated factors of prescription drug dependence (PDD), as opposed to concomitant prescription drug dependence and illicit drug use (PIDU), within a sample of individuals seeking addiction treatment. The cross sectional study was conducted on the sample recruited from three drug treatment centers in Pakistan. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with participants who met ICD-10 criteria for prescription drug dependence. Several aspects like substance use histories, negative health outcomes, patient attitude, pharmacy and physician practices also collected to predict the determinants of (PDD). Binomial logistic regression models examined the factors associated with PDD and PIDU. Of the 537 treatment seeking individuals interviewed at baseline, close to one third (178, 33.3%) met criteria for dependence on prescription drugs. The majority of the participants were male (93.3%), average age of 31 years, having urban residence (67.4%). Among participants who met criteria for dependence on prescription drugs (71.9%), reported benzodiazepines as the most frequently used drug, followed by narcotic analgesics (56.8%), cannabis/marijuana (45.5%), and heroin (41.5%). The patients reported alprazolam, buprenorphine, nalbuphine, and pentazocin use as alternatives to illicit drugs. PDD was significantly negatively associated with injectable route (OR = 0.281, 95% CI, 0.079-0.993) and psychotic symptoms (OR = 0.315, 95% CI, 0.100, 0.986). This implies that PDD is less likely to be associated with an injectable route and psychotic symptoms in contrast to PIDU. Pain, depression and sleep disorder were primary reasons for PDD. PDD was associated with the attitude that prescription drugs are safer than illicit drugs (OR = 4.057, 95%CI, 1.254-13.122) and PDD was associated with being on professional terms (i.e., having an established relationship) with pharmaceutical drugs retailers for acquisition of prescription drugs. The study found benzodiazepine and opioid dependence in sub sample of addiction treatment seekers. The results have implications for drug policy and intervention strategies for preventing and treating drug use disorders.

Revisiting Emergency Department Use of Buprenorphine as a Primary Analgesic in Non-Opioid Use Disorder Patients Post X-waiver.

Academic Emergency MedicineAccepted Articles RESEARCH LETTER Revisiting Emergency Department Use of Buprenorphine as a Primary Analgesic in Non-Opioid Use Disorder Patients Post X-waiver Jamaji C. Nwanaji-Enwerem MD, PhD, MPP, Corresponding Author Jamaji C. Nwanaji-Enwerem MD, PhD, MPP [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0003-0356-4867 Gangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Emory Rollins School of Public Health Atlanta, GA, USA Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA Correspondence Jamaji C. Nwanaji-Enwerem, Emory Rollins School of Public Health, Emory School of Medicine, Steiner Building, 68 Armstrong Street, Room 318, Atlanta, GA 30303. Email: [email protected], Phone: 404.778.5975Search for more papers by this authorLiz Eneida Rivera Blanco MD, Liz Eneida Rivera Blanco MD Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this authorEmily A. Kiernan DO, Emily A. Kiernan DO Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this authorBrent W. Morgan MD, Brent W. Morgan MD Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this authorMelissa H. Gittinger DO, Melissa H. Gittinger DO Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this authorAlaina R. Steck MD, Alaina R. Steck MD Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this author Jamaji C. Nwanaji-Enwerem MD, PhD, MPP, Corresponding Author Jamaji C. Nwanaji-Enwerem MD, PhD, MPP [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0003-0356-4867 Gangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Emory Rollins School of Public Health Atlanta, GA, USA Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA Correspondence Jamaji C. Nwanaji-Enwerem, Emory Rollins School of Public Health, Emory School of Medicine, Steiner Building, 68 Armstrong Street, Room 318, Atlanta, GA 30303. Email: [email protected], Phone: 404.778.5975Search for more papers by this authorLiz Eneida Rivera Blanco MD, Liz Eneida Rivera Blanco MD Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this authorEmily A. Kiernan DO, Emily A. Kiernan DO Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this authorBrent W. Morgan MD, Brent W. Morgan MD Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this authorMelissa H. Gittinger DO, Melissa H. Gittinger DO Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this authorAlaina R. Steck MD, Alaina R. Steck MD Department of Emergency Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USASearch for more papers by this author First published: 29 April 2023 https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.14749 This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi:10.1111/acem.14749. AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Accepted ArticlesAccepted, unedited articles published online and citable. The final edited and typeset version of record will appear in the future. RelatedInformation

Buprenorphine use and setting type among reproductive-aged women self-reporting nonmedical prescription opioid use

IntroductionScreening for opioid misuse and treatment for opioid use disorder are critical for reducing morbidity and mortality. We sought to understand the extent of self-reported past 30-day buprenorphine use in various settings among women of reproductive age with self-reported nonmedical prescription opioid use being assessed for substance use problems. MethodsThe study collected data from individuals being assessed for substance use problems using the Addiction Severity Index–Multimedia Version in 2018–2020. We stratified the sample of 10,196 women ages 12–55 self-reporting past 30-day nonmedical prescription opioid use by buprenorphine use and setting type. We categorized setting types as: buprenorphine in specialty addiction treatment, buprenorphine in office-based opioid treatment, and diverted buprenorphine. We included each woman's first intake assessment during the study period. The study assessed number of buprenorphine products, reasons for using buprenorphine, and sources of buprenorphine procurement. The study calculated frequency of reasons for using buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder outside of a doctor-managed treatment, overall and by race/ethnicity. ResultsOverall, 25.5 % of the sample used buprenorphine in specialty addiction treatment, 6.1 % used buprenorphine prescribed in office-based treatment, 21.7 % used diverted buprenorphine, and 46.7 % reported no buprenorphine use during the past 30 days. Among women who reported using buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder, but not as part of a doctor-managed treatment, 72.3 % could not find a provider or get into a treatment program, 21.8 % did not want to be part of a program or see a provider, and 6.0 % reported both; a higher proportion of American Indian/Alaska Native women (92.1 %) reported that they could not find a provider or get into a treatment program versus non-Hispanic White (78.0 %), non-Hispanic Black (76.0 %), and Hispanic (75.0 %) women. ConclusionsAppropriate screening for nonmedical prescription opioid use to assess need for treatment with medication for opioid use disorder is important for all women of reproductive age. Our data highlight opportunities to improve treatment program accessibility and availability and support the need to increase equitable access for all women.

Association of Selected State Policies and Requirements for Buprenorphine Treatment With Per Capita Months of Treatment

Expanding the use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder is a critical component of the US response to the opioid crisis, but few studies have examined how state policies are associated with buprenorphine dispensing. To examine the association of 6 selected state policies with the rate of individuals receiving buprenorphine per 1000 county residents. This cross-sectional study used 2006 to 2018 US retail pharmacy claims data for individuals dispensed buprenorphine formulations indicated for treating opioid use disorder. State implementation of policies requiring additional education for buprenorphine prescribers beyond waiver training, continuing medical education related to substance misuse and addiction, Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine, Medicaid expansion, mandatory prescriber use of prescription drug monitoring programs, and pain management clinic laws were examined. The main outcome was buprenorphine treatment months per 1000 county residents as measured using multivariable longitudinal models. Statistical analyses were conducted from September 1, 2021, through April 30, 2022, with revised analyses conducted through February 28, 2023. The mean (SD) number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 persons nationally increased steadily from 1.47 (0.04) in 2006 to 22.80 (0.55) in 2018. Requiring that buprenorphine prescribers receive additional education beyond that required to obtain the federal X-waiver was associated with significant increases in the number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in the 5 years following implementation of the requirement (from 8.51 [95% CI, 2.36-14.64] months in year 1 to 14.43 [95% CI, 2.61-26.26] months in year 5). Requiring continuing medical education for physician licensure related to substance misuse or addiction was associated with significant increases in buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in each of the 5 years following policy implementation (from 7.01 [95% CI, 3.17-10.86] months in the first year to 11.43 [95% CI, 0.61-22.25] months in the fifth year). None of the other policies examined was associated with a significant change in buprenorphine months of treatment per 1000 county residents. In this cross-sectional study of US pharmacy claims, state-mandated educational requirements beyond the initial training required to prescribe buprenorphine were associated with increased buprenorphine use over time. The findings suggest requiring education for buprenorphine prescribers and training in substance use disorder treatment for all controlled substance prescribers as an actionable proposal for increasing buprenorphine use, ultimately serving more patients. No single policy lever can ensure adequate buprenorphine supply; however, policy maker attention to the benefits of enhancing clinician education and knowledge may help to expand buprenorphine access.

Neonatal Outcomes After Use of Buprenorphine during Pregnancy

(N Engl J Med. 2022;387:2085–2086) Opioid use during pregnancy continues to rise and result in adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Buprenorphine and methadone are medications used for opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment to help prevent risks such as overdose and preterm birth. While methadone was used for decades to treat perinatal OUD, it suffers from several issues. The primary issue is that it can only be given by federally licensed drug and alcohol treatment programs, which can be a barrier for many women requiring treatment. Another issue is that it is a long-acting drug.

Correlates and Patterns in Use of Medications to Treat Opioid Use Disorder in Jail.

Little is known about the correlates of use of medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD, ie, buprenorphine, methadone, naltrexone) offered in jails. We evaluated the implementation and outcomes of a MOUD program offered by 2 of the first jails nationwide to provide access to such care. We examined use of MOUD among adults with opioid use disorder (n = 347) incarcerated by 2 rural jails in Massachusetts (2018-2021). We examined MOUD transitions from intake to during incarceration. Using logistic regression, we examined factors associated with in-jail use of MOUD. At jail entry, 48.7% of individuals with opioid use disorder were being treated with MOUD. During incarceration, 65.1% received MOUD, attributable to a 9.2% increase in use of methadone (from 15.9% to 25.1%) and a 10.1% increase in use of buprenorphine (from 28.5% to 38.6%). During incarceration, 32.3% of individuals were continued on the same MOUD from the community, 25.4% were started, 8.9% stopped, and 7.5% switched type. A total of 25.9% entered jail not on any MOUD and were not started on it. Use of MOUD during incarceration was positively associated with having received MOUD in the community (odds ratio, 12.2; 95% confidence interval, 5.8-25.5) and incarceration at site 1 compared with site 2 (OR, 24.6; 95% CI, 10.9-54.4). Expanded access to MOUD in jails can engage an at-risk population with treatment. Understanding factors related to this population's use of MOUD may aid efforts to optimize care during incarceration and after community re-entry.

Buprenorphine use and courses of care for opioid use disorder treatment within the Veterans Health Administration

BackgroundRetention of patients in buprenorphine medication treatment for opioid use disorder (B-MOUD) reduces harms associated with opioid use disorder (OUD). We sought to characterize the patients receiving B-MOUD and courses of B-MOUD in a large healthcare system. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective, open cohort study of patients with OUD who either did or did not receive B-MOUD courses within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) from January 2006 through July 2019, using VHA clinical data. We compared patients receiving or not receiving B-MOUD, characterized B-MOUD courses (e.g., length and doses), and examined persistence, across patient characteristics, over time. We used analyses for normally or non-normally distributed continuous variables, categorical data, and persistence over time (Kaplan-Meier persistence curves). ResultsWe identified 255,726 Veterans with OUD; 40,431 (15.8%) had received 63,929 B-MOUD courses. Compared to patients with OUD without B-MOUD, patients with B-MOUD were younger, more often of white race, and had more co-morbidities. The frequency of new B-MOUD starts and prevalent B-MOUD patients ranged from 1550 and 1989 in 2007 to 8146 and 16,505 in 2018, respectively. The median duration of B-MOUD was 157 (IQR: 37–537) days for all courses and 33.8% patients had more than one course. The average proportion days covered was 90% (SD: 0.15), and the average prescribed daily dose was 13.44 (SD: 6.5). ConclusionsWithin a VHA B-MOUD cohort, courses increased more than 10-fold from 2006 to 2016 with nearly half of patients experiencing multiple courses. Patient demographics seem to dictate the length of courses.

Number of buprenorphine induction attempts impacts maternal and neonatal outcomes: a multicenter cohort study

Buprenorphine can be used to treat maternal opioid use disorder effectively and decrease obstetrical risks. Compared with the use of other medications to treat opioid use disorder, the use of buprenorphine results in improved neonatal outcomes; however, its use is associated with higher rates of treatment attrition. Initiation of buprenorphine, termed "induction," is a high-risk time for treatment dropout and can require repeated attempts. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of multiple buprenorphine induction attempts on maternal and neonatal outcomes. This was a retrospective cohort study of all pregnant patients who underwent sublingual buprenorphine induction for the treatment of opioid use disorder from June 18, 2018, to January 1, 2021, at 3 tertiary care centers. Patients who required only 1 attempt for successful buprenorphine induction were compared with those who required multiple attempts but ultimately were successful in the treatment initiation during pregnancy, confirmed by urine drug screening. The primary outcome was nonprescribed opioid use at the time of delivery. The secondary outcomes included obstetrical and neonatal outcomes associated with opioid use disorder. Background characteristics were compared using Fisher exact, chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, and Student t tests. The outcomes were compared using multivariable logistic regression, and time to delivery after initiation of prenatal care was compared between groups using Kaplan-Meier curves and a Cox proportional-hazards model. Overall, 63 patients undergoing buprenorphine induction during pregnancy were included, with 38 (60.3%) patients with 1 attempt and 25 patients (39.7%) with multiple attempts. There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups in terms of background characteristics. Compared with a single successful attempt, multiple attempts at buprenorphine induction were associated with a significantly increased odds of nonprescribed opioid use at the time of delivery (76.0% vs 15.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 30.00; 95% confidence interval, 5.50-163.90), increased risk of preterm birth (48.0% vs 15.8%; adjusted hazard ratio, 3.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-8.95), and decreased rate of breastfeeding at both maternal discharge (24.0% vs 78.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.30) and infant discharge (24.0% vs 55.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.80). Requiring multiple attempts for buprenorphine induction significantly increases the odds of nonprescribed opioid use at the time of delivery and preterm birth and decreases the odds of breastfeeding. As the buprenorphine induction process may affect obstetrical outcomes for patients induced during pregnancy, investigating the techniques that increase the likelihood of successful induction is crucially needed to improve outcomes in patients with maternal opioid use disorder.

A Retrospective Comparison of the Effectiveness of Buprenorphine Versus Baclofen for Acute Opioid Withdrawal.

A significant impediment to opioid cessation or dose reduction is mitigating withdrawal severity that has been shown to affect the course of opioid dependence. Current guidelines recommend the use of buprenorphine and methadone over alpha-2 adrenergic agonists. Baclofen, a GABA-B agonist, has promising results as an adjunct agent for opioid withdrawal but has not been compared to buprenorphine. This study compared the ability of buprenorphine and baclofen to mitigate acute opioid withdrawal. This was a single-center, retrospective chart review of 63 patients with diagnosed opioid use disorder that received scheduled buprenorphine or baclofen for 3 days, in addition to as-needed medications during 2 distinct time periods (pre-2017 and 2017-2020). Patients were admitted to the inpatient detoxification unit at Gateway Community Services in Jacksonville, FL. The results showed that patients achieving detoxification success were 11.2 times more likely to be exposed to baclofen than buprenorphine (95% CI 3.32 - 37.83, P < .001). Completion of detoxification protocol (baclofen 63.2% vs buprenorphine 72%, P = .649) and incidence of orthostatic hypotension (15.8% versus 0%, P = .073) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Patients treated with baclofen had a lower frequency of secondary medication use for acute opioid withdrawal than patients treated with buprenorphine. This raises an interesting question of whether baclofen is comparable to buprenorphine for treating opioid withdrawal. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial in a larger patient population is warranted to determine this difference.

Benzodiazepine Dose Intensity among Patients Concurrently Prescribed Buprenorphine in Rhode Island

Background: The concomitant use of buprenorphine and benzodiazepines has been linked to patient fatalities, with greater risk occurring with higher doses of benzodiazepines. We assessed benzodiazepine dose intensity among patients who were concurrently prescribed buprenorphine, as compared with patients prescribed benzodiazepines who were not receiving buprenorphine. Methods : We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of adult patients who received at least a 30-day supply of benzodiazepines during 2018, using data from the Rhode Island (RI) Prescription Drug Monitoring Program. Mean daily diazepam milligram equivalents (DME) were calculated overall and according to patient sex, age group, payment type, and RI county. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the odds of higher-dose benzodiazepine utilization among patients with concurrent use of buprenorphine, as compared with patients not prescribed buprenorphine, adjusting for patient demographics. Results : Compared to patients prescribed benzodiazepines who were not receiving buprenorphine, those with concurrent buprenorphine utilization had a significantly higher mean DME/day (19.22, 95% CI: 18.70-19.74; vs 10.94, 95% CI: 10.93-10.95; p < 0.001). Patients who were prescribed benzodiazepines with concurrent utilization of buprenorphine also had a comparatively higher odds of a DME/day ≥15 (aOR: 2.86, 95% CI: 2.63-3.10), ≥20 DME/day (aOR: 2.98, 95% CI: 2.75-3.24), and ≥25 DME/day (aOR: 2.99, 95% CI: 2.65-3.18). Conclusion : Compared to patients prescribed benzodiazepines for at least 30 days who were not receiving buprenorphine, patients concurrently utilizing benzodiazepines and buprenorphine had more than twice the odds of higher dose benzodiazepine utilization. Future studies are needed to assess the relationship between benzodiazepine dose intensity, overdose outcomes, and treatment retention among patients receiving buprenorphine.

Predictors of opioid overdose during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of relapse, treatment access and nonprescribed buprenorphine/naloxone

IntroductionEmerging data indicate a disproportionate increase in overdose deaths since the onset of COVID-19. Speculation about causes for the increase center on rising drug use, illicit drug supply changes, and reduced treatment access. Possible overdose mitigation factors include reduced federal MOUD prescribing restrictions, naloxone distribution programs, and increased use of telehealth. Similarly, nonprescribed buprenorphine (NPB) use, increasingly described as a harm reduction strategy in the absence of treatment, may have moderated overdose risk. This study explored factors associated with pandemic-related overdose in people who use opioids (PWUO) in New Jersey. MethodsWe surveyed 342 PWUO from March to May 2021. Approximately 50 % of our sample was treated at some time since the COVID-19 emergency declaration in March 2020. The risk and protective factors associated with overdose were identified using Pearson's chi square test and ANOVA and tested in a series of multivariable logistic regression models for the full sample and the subsample of PWUO treated during the pandemic. ResultsForty-eight percent of respondents increased their drug use during the pandemic, including 32 % who relapsed after previous abstinence. Fifteen percent overdosed at least once since March 2020. In the full sample, overdose was associated with Hispanic ethnicity (AOR = 3.51; 95 % CI = 1.22–10.11), pre-pandemic overdose (AOR = 6.75; 95 % CI = 3.03–15.02), lack/loss of medical insurance (AOR = 3.02; 95 % CI = 1.01–9.02), relapse (AOR = 2.94; 95 % CI = 1.36–6.36), and nonprescribed use of buprenorphine/naloxone (AOR = 3.16; 95 % CI = 1.49–6.70). The study found similar trends in the treatment sample, with the exceptions that heroin/fentanyl use also predicted overdose (AOR = 3.43; 95 % CI = 1.20–9.78) and the association of overdose with nonprescribed buprenorphine/naloxone was stronger (AOR = 4.91; 95 % CI = 2.01–12.03). Potential mitigating factors, such as take-home methadone and telehealth, were not significant. ConclusionsRelapse during the pandemic was widespread and a significant contributor to overdose. Lack/loss of medical insurance further exacerbated the risk. Despite the growing literature reporting “therapeutic” use of NPB, people using nonprescribed buprenorphine/naloxone in the current study experienced up to five times the risk of overdose as nonusers. This finding suggests that, despite therapeutic intent, PWUO may be using NPB in ways that are ineffectual for addiction management, especially in the context of changing buprenorphine induction protocols in the context of fentanyl.

Buprenorphine shows lower risk of adverse neonatal outcomes than methadone

Results of a cohort study suggest that use of buprenorphine during pregnancy leads to a reduced risk of adverse neonatal outcomes compared with methadone. There was no significant difference between buprenorphine and methadone in risk of adverse maternal outcomes.

The impact of an emergency department peer navigator (EDPN) program in improving clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization in an urban setting

IntroductionEmergency Department Peer Navigator Programs (EDPN) have been shown to increase the prescribing of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and improve linkage to addiction care. However, what is not known is whether it can improve overall clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization in patients with OUD. MethodsThis is a single-center, IRB approved, retrospective cohort study using patients with OUD enrolled in our peer navigator program from 11/7/19 to 2/16/21. On an annual basis, we determined MOUD clinic follow-up rates and clinical outcomes in those patients who utilized our EDPN program. Finally, we also looked at the social determinants of health factors (e.g., race, status of medical insurance, lack of housing, access to phone and/or internet, employment, etc.) that impact our patients clinical outcomes. ED and inpatient provider notes were reviewed to determine causes of ED visits and hospitalizations one year before and after enrollment into the program. The clinical outcomes of interest were number of ED visits from all-causes, number of ED visits from opioid-related causes, number of hospitalizations from all-causes, and number of hospitalizations from opioid-related causes one year after enrollment into our EDPN program, subsequent urine drug screens, and mortality. Demographic and socioeconomic factors (age, gender, race, employment, housing, insurance status, access to phone) were also analyzed to determine if any were independently associated with clinical outcomes. Death and cardiac arrests were noted. Clinical outcomes data were described using descriptive statistics and compared using t-tests. Results149 patients with OUD were included in our study. 39.6% had an opioid-related chief complaint at their index ED visit; 51.0% had any recorded history of MOUD and 46.3% had history of buprenorphine use. 31.5% had buprenorphine given in the ED with individual doses ranging from 2 to 16 mg and 46.3% were provided with a buprenorphine prescription. The average number of ED visits 1-year pre vs post enrollment, respectively, for all-causes was 3.09 vs 2.20 (p < 0.01); for opioid related complications 1.80 vs 0.72 (p < 0. 01). The average number of hospitalizations 1-year pre and post enrollment, respectively, for all-causes was 0.83 vs 0.60 (p = 0.05); for opioid related complications 0.39 vs 0.09 (p < 0.01). ED visits from all-causes decreased in 90 (60.40%) patients, had no change in 28 (18.79%) patients, and increased in 31 (20.81%) patients (p < 0.01). ED visits from opioid-related complications decreased in 92 (61.74%) patients, had no change in 40 (26.85%) patients, and increased in 17 (11.41%) (p < 0.01). Hospitalizations from all causes decreased in 45 (30.20%) patients, had no change in 75 patients (50.34%), and increased in 29 (19.46%) patients (p < 0.01). Lastly, hospitalizations from opioid-related complications decreased in 31 (20.81%) patients, had no change in 113 (75.84%) patients, and increased in 5 (3.36%) patients (p < 0.01). There were no socioeconomic factors that had a statistically significant association with clinical outcomes. Two patients (1.2%) died within 1 year after study enrollment. ConclusionsOur study found that there was an association between implementation of an EDPN program and decreases in ED visits and hospitalizations from both all-causes as well as from opioid-related complications for patients with opioid use disorder.