Search

Abstract Background People who use drugs (PWUD) in rural communities increasingly use stimulants, such as methamphetamine and cocaine, with opioids. We examined differences in hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing and treatment history among rural PWUD with opioids, stimulants, and other substance use combinations. Methods PWUD were enrolled from ten rural U.S. communities from 2018 to 2020. Participants self-reporting a positive HCV result were asked about their HCV treatment history and drug use history. Drug use was categorized as opioids alone, stimulants alone, both, or other drug(s) within the past 30 days. Prevalence ratios (PR) were yielded using adjusted multivariable log-binomial regression with generalized linear mixed models. Results Of the 2,705 PWUD, most reported both opioid and stimulant use (74%); while stimulant-only (12%), opioid-only (11%), and other drug use (2%) were less common. Most (76%) reported receiving HCV testing. Compared to other drug use, those who reported opioid use alone had a lower prevalence of HCV testing (aPR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.63, 1.02). Among participants (n = 944) who self-reported an HCV diagnosis in their lifetime, 111 (12%) ever took anti-HCV medication; those who used both opioids and stimulants were less likely to have taken anti-HCV medication compared with other drug(s) (aPR = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.19, 0.91). Conclusions In this pre-COVID study of U.S. rural PWUD, those who reported opioid use alone had a lower prevalence of reported HCV testing. Those diagnosed with HCV and reported both opioid and stimulant use were less likely to report ever taking anti-HCV medication.

Abstract Background Incarceration provides an opportunity for health interventions, including opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment and prevention of opioid-related overdoses post-release. All FDA-approved forms of medication for OUD (MOUD) treatment were mandated in several Massachusetts jails in 2019, with some jails offering extended-release buprenorphine (XR-Bup). Little is known about patient perspectives on and experiences with XR-Bup in carceral settings. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews in 2022 with community-dwelling people who received MOUD during a recent incarceration in a Massachusetts jail. We asked participants about their experiences with and perspectives on XR-Bup while in jail. Qualitative data were double-coded deductively and reviewed inductively to identify emergent themes, which were structured using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Results Participants (n = 38) had a mean age of 41.5 years, were 86% male, 84% White, 24% Hispanic, and 95% continued to receive MOUD at the time of their interview, including 11% receiving XR-Bup. Participants who viewed XR-Bup favorably appreciated avoiding the taste of sublingual buprenorphine; avoiding procedural difficulties and indignities associated with daily dosing in carceral settings (e.g., mouth checks, stigmatizing treatment from correctional staff); avoiding daily reminders of their addiction; experiencing less withdrawal; having extra time for other activities, such as work; and reduction of diversion of MOUD within the jail setting. Participants who viewed XR-Bup less favorably preferred to maintain their daily dosing routine; liked daily time out of their housing unit; wanted to know what was “going into my body everyday”; and feared needles and adverse events. Participants also reported that jail clinicians used XR-Bup for patients who were previously caught diverting sublingual buprenorphine, suggesting limited patient participation in decision-making around XR-Bup initiation in some jails. Conclusion People who received MOUD in Massachusetts jails had both favorable and unfavorable views and experiences with XR-Bup. Understanding these preferences can inform protocols in jails that are considering implementation of XR-Bup treatment.

Background The outcomes of planned implementation efforts have been mixed, with some applications failing to achieve the desired change or impact. While reasons for mixed findings in implementation research are multifaceted (e.g., Damschroder et al., 2009, 2022), how the implementation strategy (IS) was deployed (i.e., integrity) and its impact on the implementation outcomes of evidence-based innovations (EBIs) is under-studied and warrants further clarification. Method This article builds on the IS fidelity and mechanisms of change literature to create the Implementation Strategy Integrity Framework (ISIF). The ISIF was developed by a set of implementation science researchers in the Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network seeking to document the role of implementation strategies in influencing EBI outcomes. Results The authors identified four areas of documentation and measurement to examine the role of IS integrity on EBI outcomes. (a) Implementation Strategy Rigor (i.e., adherence, dose, and quality) requires those implementing the strategy/strategies to specify them, document adherence to the planned strategies, quality of execution, and any adaptations made. (b) Target User Responsiveness documents the extent and quality of targeted users’ participation in IS activities and how well the target users perform their roles in conducting actions intended by the implementation strategies. (c) Target Mechanism Activation notes to what degree the implementation strategies achieved the intended impact(s) on targeted factors that facilitate EBI use. Finally, (d) these three areas are combined with selected Inner and Outer Context variables to explain IS integrity’s potential moderating and mediating effects on EBI outcomes. Conclusions A framework that can define the integrity of an IS and allow for its subsequent use as an explanatory variable in EBI outcomes is necessary for better elucidating mechanisms of action. The ISIF offers a structured approach to operationalize, measure, and evaluate the application and related impacts of implementation strategies.

Abstract Background Opioid-related overdose is the leading cause of death for people recently released from incarceration, however treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) during incarceration can reduce the mortality risk. This study seeks to qualitatively analyze perceptions of post-release overdose risk from the perspectives of people who received MOUD while incarcerated in one of eight Massachusetts jails during 2021–2022 using the Risk Environment Framework to guide analyses. Methods N = 38 participants with lived experience of MOUD treatment during incarceration who are now living in the community were interviewed on factors that may contribute to or protect against post-release overdose risk. Themes were identified inductively and deductively using the Risk Environment Framework and its domains, which organizes themes along physical, social, economic, and policy environments on both the micro- and macro- scales. Results The physical risk environment included loss of opioid tolerance during incarceration, polysubstance use, and the toxicity of the regional drug supply as key producers of increased risk for post-release overdose. Social drivers of risk included peer group risk norms—including peer-driven harm reduction practices and interpersonal relationships between drug sellers and buyers—as well as macro-level social determinants of health such as housing insecurity and availability of mental health services. Economic drivers of post-release overdose risk included lack of income generation during incarceration and employment challenges. Participants discussed several aspects of policy that contribute to post-release overdose risk, including availability of harm reduction supplies, public health services, and broader policy around MOUD. Conclusions The perspectives of people with lived experience are vital to understanding the disproportionate risks of overdose for those recently released from incarceration. Our results highlight the intersectional factors that produce and reproduce the post-release overdose risk environment, providing support for interventions across each domain of the Risk Environment Framework. By capturing perspectives from people with lived experience of OUD and incarceration during this critical period of risk, we can better identify interventions that target and mitigate overdose-related harm in this population.

Abstract Background Accurate prevalence estimates of drug use and its harms are important to characterize burden and develop interventions to reduce negative health outcomes and disparities. Lack of a sampling frame for marginalized/stigmatized populations, including persons who use drugs (PWUD) in rural settings, makes this challenging. Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is frequently used to recruit PWUD. However, the validity of RDS-generated population-level prevalence estimates relies on assumptions that should be evaluated. Methods RDS was used to recruit PWUD across seven Rural Opioid Initiative studies between 2018-2020. To evaluate RDS assumptions, we computed recruitment homophily and design effects, generated convergence and bottleneck plots, and tested for recruitment and degree differences. We compared sample proportions with three RDS-adjusted estimators (two variations of RDS-I and RDS-II) for five variables of interest (past 30-day use of heroin, fentanyl, and methamphetamine; past 6-month homelessness; and being positive for hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody) using linear regression with robust confidence intervals. We compared regression estimates for the associations between HCV positive antibody status and (a) heroin use, (b) fentanyl use, and (c) age using RDS-1 and RDS-II probability weights and no weights using logistic and modified Poisson regression and random-effects meta-analyses. Results Among 2,842 PWUD, median age was 34 years and 43% were female. Most participants (54%) reported opioids as their drug of choice, however regional differences were present (e.g., methamphetamine range: 4-52%). Many recruitment chains were not long enough to achieve sample equilibrium. Recruitment homophily was present for some variables. Differences with respect to recruitment and degree varied across studies. Prevalence estimates varied only slightly with different RDS weighting approaches, most confidence intervals overlapped. Variations in measures of association varied little based on weighting approach. Conclusions RDS was a useful recruitment tool for PWUD in rural settings. However, several violations of key RDS assumptions were observed which slightly impacts estimation of proportion although not associations.

Abstract Background Hospitalization presents an opportunity to begin people with opioid use disorder (OUD) on medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and link them to care after discharge; regrettably, people admitted to the hospital with an underlying OUD typically do not receive MOUD and are not connected with subsequent treatment for their condition. To address this gap, we launched a multi-site randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of a hospital-based addiction consultation team (the Substance Use Treatment and Recovery Team (START)) consisting of an addiction medicine specialist and care manager team that provide collaborative care and a specified intervention to people with OUD during the inpatient stay. Successful implementation of new practices can be impacted by organizational context, though no previous studies have examined context prior to implementation of addiction consultation services (ACS). This study assessed pre-implementation context for implementing a specialized ACS and tailoring it accordingly. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with hospital administrators, physicians, physician assistants, nurses, and social workers at the three study sites between April and August 2021 before the launch of the pragmatic trial. Using an analytical framework based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we completed a thematic analysis of interview data to understand potential barriers or enablers and perceptions about acceptability and feasibility. Results We interviewed 28 participants across three sites. The following themes emerged across sites: (1) START is an urgently needed model for people with OUD; (2) Intervention adaptations are recommended to meet local and cultural needs; (3) Linking people with OUD to community clinicians is a highly needed component of START; (4) It is important to engage stakeholders across departments and roles throughout implementation. Across sites, participants generally saw a need for change from usual care to support people with OUD, and thought the START was acceptable and feasible to implement. Differences among sites included tailoring the START to support the needs of varying patient populations and different perceptions of the prevalence of OUD. Conclusions Hospitals planning to implement an ACS in the inpatient setting may wish to engage in a systematic pre-implementation contextual assessment using a similar framework to understand and address potential barriers and contextual factors that may impact implementation. Pre-implementation work can help ensure the ACS and other new practices fit within each unique hospital context.

Abstract Background Drug overdose deaths in the United States exceeded 100,000 in 2021 and 2022. Substance use stigma is a major barrier to treatment and harm reduction utilization and is a priority target in ending the overdose epidemic. However, little is known about the relationship between stigma and overdose, especially in rural areas. We aimed to characterize the association between felt stigma and non-fatal overdose in a multi-state sample of rural-dwelling people who use drugs. Methods Between January 2018 and March 2020, 2,608 people reporting past 30-day opioid use were recruited via modified chain-referral sampling in rural areas across 10 states. Participants completed a computer-assisted survey of substance use and substance-related attitudes, behaviors, and experiences. We used multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations to test the association between felt stigma and recent non-fatal overdose. Results 6.6% of participants (n = 173) reported an overdose in the past 30 days. Recent non-fatal overdose was significantly associated with felt stigma after adjusting for demographic and substance use-related covariates (aOR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.20–1.81). The association remained significant in sensitivity analyses on component fear of enacted stigma items (aOR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.20–1.83) and an internalized stigma item (aOR: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.07–2.14). Conclusions Felt stigma related to substance use is associated with higher risk of non-fatal overdose in rural-dwelling people who use drugs. Stigma reduction interventions and tailored services for those experiencing high stigma are underutilized approaches that may mitigate overdose risk.

Abstract Background Implementation of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in jails varies by facility and across states. Organizational climate, including staff attitudes toward change and exposure to education, can influence perceptions of innovations like MOUD in jails. Using a mixed methods design, we aimed to understand the association between organizational climate and jail staff perceptions of MOUD. Methods Jail staff (n = 111) who operate MOUD programs in 6 Massachusetts jails completed surveys that included the Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC) survey. Random effects logistic regression models assessed associations between organizational climate and several outcomes of perceived MOUD efficacy, acceptability, and knowledge, while controlling for covariates. Jail staff (N = 61) participated in qualitative interviews and focus groups focused on organizational climate and knowledge diffusion, which we analyzed using inductive and deductive methods. Results The results indicate that organizational change readiness on the ORIC was associated with positive perceptions of MOUD, and educational resources facilitated MOUD implementation. Greater ORIC was associated with higher perception of methadone as highly acceptable for jail populations (Odds ratio [OR] 2.3, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.2 to 4.4), and high knowledge of methadone (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.9), with similar magnitude of effects for buprenorphine. High levels of training for jail staff on methadone and buprenorphine were also associated with higher knowledge of these medications (Methadone: OR 7.2, 95% CI 2.2 to 23.2; Buprenorphine: OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.2 to 9.5). Qualitative results point towards the importance of organizational climate and elucidate educational strategies to improve staff perceptions of MOUD. Conclusion Results underscore the importance of organizational climate for successful implementation of jail MOUD programs and provide support for medication-specific educational resources as a facilitator of successful MOUD implementation in jail settings. Findings highlight implementation strategies that may improve jail staff perceptions of MOUD.

Abstract Background Hepatitis C virus (HCV) disproportionately affects rural communities, where health services are geographically dispersed. It remains unknown whether proximity to a syringe services program (SSP) is associated with HCV infection among rural people who inject drugs (PWID). Methods Data are from a cross-sectional sample of adults who reported injecting drugs in the past 30 days recruited from rural counties in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts (2018–2019). We calculated the road network distance between each participant’s address and the nearest fixed-site SSP, categorized as ≤ 1 mile, 1–3 miles, 3–10 miles, and > 10 miles. Staff performed HCV antibody tests and a survey assessed past 30-day injection equipment sharing practices: borrowing used syringes, borrowing other used injection equipment, and backloading. Mixed effects modified Poisson regression estimated prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Analyses were also stratified by means of transportation. Results Among 330 PWID, 25% lived ≤ 1 mile of the nearest SSP, 17% lived 1–3 miles of an SSP, 12% lived 3–10 miles of an SSP, and 46% lived > 10 miles from an SSP. In multivariable models, compared to PWID who lived within 1 mile of an SSP, those who lived 3 to 10 miles away had a higher prevalence of HCV seropositivity (aPR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.06–1.46), borrowing other used injection equipment (aPR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.04–1.46), and backloading (aPR: 1.48, 95% CI 1.17–1.88). Similar results were observed for PWID living > 10 miles from an SSP: aPR [HCV]: 1.19, 95% CI 1.01–1.40; aPR [borrowing other used equipment]:1.45, 95% CI 1.29–1.63; and aPR [backloading]: 1.59, 95% CI 1.13–2.24. Associations between living 1 to 3 miles of an SSP and each outcome did not reach statistical significance. When stratified by means of transportation, associations between distance to SSP and each outcome (except borrowing other used injection equipment) were only observed among PWID who traveled by other means (versus traveled by automobile). Conclusions Among PWID in rural New England, living farther from a fixed-site SSP was associated with a higher prevalence of HCV seropositivity, borrowing other used injection equipment, and backloading, reinforcing the need to increase SSP accessibility in rural areas. Means of transportation may modify this relationship.

The ongoing hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemic in the United States disproportionately affects rural people who inject drugs (PWID). This study explores the HCV risk environment in rural northern New England by examining PWID experiences and perceptions of HCV and injection equipment-sharing practices. We performed a thematic analysis on semi-structured interviews conducted with 21 adults with a history of injection drug use from rural New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts between April 2018 and August 2019. Salient themes included: (1) limited and varied access to sterile syringe sources; (2) syringe scarcity contributing to the use of informal syringe sources (e.g., secondary syringe exchange or syringe sellers who purchased syringes from out-of-state pharmacies); (3) syringe scarcity contributing to syringe sharing; (4) linkages among decisions about syringe sharing and perceptions of HCV risk, HCV status, and interpersonal trust; and (5) confusion and misconceptions about HCV, including difficulty learning one’s HCV status, inadequate HCV education, and misconceptions regarding HCV transmission and treatment. Efforts to prevent and eliminate HCV among rural PWID should expand syringe access, increase awareness of HCV as a serious but preventable risk, and acknowledge social connections as potential influences on syringe access and syringe-sharing decisions.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) disproportionately affects people who inject drugs (PWID). Although HCV has become universally curable since the arrival of direct-acting antivirals, barriers exist to facilitating care and cure in this historically hard-to-reach population, including limited testing and healthcare services and healthcare stigma, issues that are compounded in rural areas. Telehealth is effective in increasing access to HCV care and cure, but innovative approaches of testing and care are required to fully address the need among rural PWID, which led to our study examining a mobile telehealth model for treating HCV. In this commentary, we discuss lessons learned delivering telehealth on a mobile unit, important factors for consideration when designing a mobile intervention, and we suggest an ideal model to increase access to HCV testing and treatment and other services for rural PWID.

Abstract Background Research conducted in urban areas has highlighted the impact of housing instability on people who inject drugs (PWID), revealing that it exacerbates vulnerability to drug-related harms and impedes syringe service program (SSP) use. However, few studies have explored the effects of houselessness on SSP use among rural PWID. This study examines the relationship between houselessness and SSP utilization among PWID in eight rural areas across 10 states. Methods PWID were recruited using respondent-driven sampling for a cross-sectional survey that queried self-reported drug use and SSP utilization in the prior 30 days, houselessness in the prior 6 months and sociodemographic characteristics. Using binomial logistic regression, we examined the relationship between experiencing houselessness and any SSP use. To assess the relationship between houselessness and the frequency of SSP use, we conducted multinomial logistic regression analyses among participants reporting any past 30-day SSP use. Results Among 2394 rural PWID, 56.5% had experienced houselessness in the prior 6 months, and 43.5% reported past 30-day SSP use. PWID who had experienced houselessness were more likely to report using an SSP compared to their housed counterparts (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.24 [95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.01, 1.52]). Among those who had used an SSP at least once (n = 972), those who experienced houselessness were just as likely to report SSP use two (aOR = 0.90 [95% CI 0.60, 1.36]) and three times (aOR = 1.18 [95% CI 0.77, 1.98]) compared to once. However, they were less likely to visit an SSP four or more times compared to once in the prior 30 days (aOR = 0.59 [95% CI 0.40, 0.85]). Conclusion This study provides evidence that rural PWID who experience houselessness utilize SSPs at similar or higher rates as their housed counterparts. However, housing instability may pose barriers to more frequent SSP use. These findings are significant as people who experience houselessness are at increased risk for drug-related harms and encounter additional challenges when attempting to access SSPs.

Abstract Background Among people who inject drugs (PWID), obtaining syringes via syringe services programs (SSPs) and pharmacies reduces injection sharing practices associated with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Whether indirect use of SSPs via secondary exchange confers a similar benefit remains unknown, particularly in rural settings. We compared HCV serostatus and injection sharing practices by primary syringe source among a sample of rural PWID. Methods Data are from a cross-sectional study of adults who use drugs recruited from eleven rural counties in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts using respondent-driven sampling (2018–2019). Study staff performed HCV antibody testing. An audio computer-assisted self-interview assessed sociodemographic characteristics, past 30-day injection practices, and past 30-day primary syringe source. Primary syringe source was classified as direct SSP, pharmacy, indirect SSP (secondary exchange), or “other” (friend/acquaintance, street seller, partner/relative, found them). Mixed effects modified Poisson models assessed the association of primary syringe source with HCV seroprevalence and injection sharing practices. Results Among 397 PWID, the most common primary syringe source was “other” (33%), then pharmacies (27%), SSPs (22%), and secondary exchange (18%). In multivariable models, compared with those obtaining most syringes from “other” sources, those obtaining most syringes from pharmacies had a lower HCV seroprevalence [adjusted prevalence ratio (APR):0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73–0.9985]; however, the upper bound of the 95% CI was close to 1.0. Compared with those obtaining most syringes from other sources, PWID obtaining most syringes directly from SSPs or pharmacies were less likely to report borrowing used syringes [APR(SSP):0.60, 95% CI 0.43–0.85 and APR(Pharmacies):0.70, 95% CI 0.52–0.93], borrowing used injection equipment [APR(SSP):0.59, 95% CI 0.50–0.69 and APR (Pharmacies):0.81, 95% CI 0.68–0.98], and backloading [APR(SSP):0.65, 95% CI 0.48–0.88 and APR(Pharmacies):0.78, 95% CI 0.67–0.91]. Potential inverse associations between obtaining most syringes via secondary exchange and injection sharing practices did not reach the threshold for statistical significance. Conclusions PWID in rural New England largely relied on informal syringe sources (i.e., secondary exchange or sources besides SSPs/pharmacies). Those obtaining most syringes from an SSP or pharmacy were less likely to share injection equipment/syringes and had a lower HCV seroprevalence, which suggests using these sources reduces the risk of new HCV infections or serves as proxy for past injection behavior.

Background: People who inject drugs (PWID) are at risk for severe bacterial and fungal infections including skin and soft tissue infections, endocarditis, and osteomyelitis. PWID have high rates of self-directed discharge and are often not offered outpatient antimicrobial therapies, despite studies showing their efficacy and safety in PWID. This study fills a gap in knowledge of patient and community partner perspectives on treatment and discharge decision making for injection drug use (IDU)-associated infections. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients ( n = 10) hospitalized with IDU-associated infections and community partners ( n = 6) in the Portland, Maine region. Community partners include peer support workers at syringe services programs (SSPs) and outreach specialists working with PWID. We transcribed and thematically analyzed interviews to explore perspectives on three domains: perspectives on long-term hospitalization, outpatient treatment options, and patient involvement in decision making. Results: Participants noted that stigma and inadequate pain management created poor hospitalization experiences that contributed to self-directed discharge. On the other hand, patients reported hospitalization provided opportunities to connect to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and protect them from outside substance use triggers. Many patients expressed interest in outpatient antimicrobial treatment options conditional upon perceived efficacy of the treatment, perceived ability to complete treatment, and available resources and social support. Finally, both patients and community partners emphasized the importance of autonomy and inclusion in medical decision making. Although some participants acknowledged their SUD, withdrawal symptoms, or undertreated pain might interfere with decision making, they felt these medical conditions were not justification for health care professionals withholding treatment options. They recommended open communication to build trust and reduce harms. Conclusion: Patients with IDU-associated infections desire autonomy, respect, and patient-centered care from healthcare workers, and may self-discharge when needs or preferences are not met. Involving patients in treatment decisions and offering outpatient antimicrobial options may result in better outcomes. However, patient involvement in decision making may be complicated by many contextual factors unique to each patient, suggesting a need for shared decision making to meet the needs of hospitalized patients with IDU-associated infections.

Abstract Objective To characterize and address the opioid crisis disproportionately impacting rural U.S. regions. Methods The Rural Opioid Initiative (ROI) is a two-phase project to collect and harmonize quantitative and qualitative data and develop tailored interventions to address rural opioid use. The baseline quantitative survey data from people who use drugs (PWUD) characterizes the current opioid epidemic (2018–2020) in eight geographically diverse regions. Results Among 3,084 PWUD, 92% reported ever injecting drugs, 86% reported using opioids (most often heroin) and 74% reported using methamphetamine to get high in the past 30 days; 53% experienced homelessness in the prior 6 months; and 49% had ever overdosed. Syringe service program use varied by region and 53% had ever received an overdose kit or naloxone prescription. Less than half (48%) ever received medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Conclusions The ROI combines data across eight rural regions to better understand drug use including drivers and potential interventions in rural areas with limited resources. Baseline ROI data demonstrate extensive overlap between opioid and methamphetamine use, high homelessness rates, inadequate access to MOUD, and other unmet needs among PWUD in the rural U.S. By combining data across studies, the ROI provides much greater statistical power to address research questions and better understand the syndemic of infectious diseases and drug use in rural settings including unmet treatment needs.

Abstract Background People with opioid use disorder experience high burden of disease from medical comorbidities and are increasingly hospitalized with medical complications. Medications for opioid use disorder are an effective, life-saving treatment, but patients with an opioid use disorder admitted to the hospital seldom initiate medication for their disorder while in the hospital, nor are they linked with outpatient treatment after discharge. The inpatient stay, when patients may be more receptive to improving their health and reducing substance use, offers an opportunity to discuss opioid use disorder and facilitate medication initiation and linkage to treatment after discharge. An addiction-focus consultative team that uses evidence-based tools and resources could address barriers, such as the need for the primary medical team to focus on the primary health problem and lack of time and expertise, that prevent primary medical teams from addressing substance use. Methods This study is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial that will evaluate whether a consultative team, called the Substance Use Treatment and Recovery Team (START), increases initiation of any US Food and Drug Administration approved medication for opioid use disorder (buprenorphine, methadone, naltrexone) during the hospital stay and increases linkage to treatment after discharge compared to patients receiving usual care. The study is being conducted at three geographically distinct academic hospitals. Patients are randomly assigned within each hospital to receive the START intervention or usual care. Primary study outcomes are initiation of medication for opioid use disorder in the hospital and linkage to medication or other opioid use disorder treatment after discharge. Outcomes are assessed through participant interviews at baseline and 1 month after discharge and data from hospital and outpatient medical records. Discussion The START intervention offers a compelling model to improve care for hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder. The study could also advance translational science by identifying an effective and generalizable approach to treating not only opioid use disorder, but also other substance use disorders and behavioral health conditions. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05086796, Registered on 10/21/2021. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?recrs=ab&cond=&term=NCT05086796&cntry=&state=&city=&dist =

Introduction: Release from incarceration is a high-risk period for opioid overdose. Concern about COVID-19 spread in jails led to early releases; it is unknown whether pandemic era releases of persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) contributed to increases in community overdose rates. Methods: Observational data compared overdose rates three months after release among jailed persons with OUD released before (9/1/2019–3/9/2020) and during the pandemic (3/10/2020–8/10/2020) from seven jails in Massachusetts. Data on overdoses come from the Massachusetts Ambulance Trip Record Information System and Registry of Vital Records Death Certificate file. Other information came from jail administrative data. Logistic models regressed overdose on release period, controlling for MOUD received, county of release, race/ethnicity, sex, age, and prior overdose. Results: Pandemic releases with OUD had a higher risk of fatal overdose (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.06; 95% CI, 1.49 to 6.26); 20 persons released with OUD (1.3%) experienced a fatal overdose within three months of release, versus 14 (0.5%) pre-pandemic. MOUD had no detectable relationship with overdose mortality. Pandemic release did not impact non-fatal overdose rates (aOR 0.84; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.18), though in-jail methadone treatment was protective (aOR 0.34; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.67). Conclusions: Persons with OUD released from jail during the pandemic experienced higher overdose mortality compared to pre-pandemic, but the number of deaths was small. They did not experience significantly different rates of non-fatal overdose. Early jail releases during the pandemic were unlikely to explain much, if any, of the observed increase in community overdoses in Massachusetts.

Background The objective of this study was to assess potential challenges, prioritize adaptations, and develop an implementation and research approach to integrate and study a parenting intervention for mothers in recovery from substance use disorders in community-based home-visiting programs. Method An explanatory mixed-methods design, guided by process mapping with Failure Modes and Effects Analysis tools, and an Advisory Panel of 15 community members, identified potential implementation challenges and recommended solutions for the proposed intervention within five pre-specified domains. Thematic content analysis identified themes from detailed field notes. Results The Advisory Panel identified 44 potential challenges across all domains. They determined that the recruitment domain was most likely to create challenges. Regarding the potential challenges, two cross-domain themes emerged: (1) development of mistrust in the community and (2) difficulty initiating and sustaining engagement. Potential solutions and adaptations to protocols are reported. Conclusion Mistrust in the community was cited as a potentially important challenge for the delivery and study of an evidence-based parenting intervention for mothers in recovery through home-visiting programs. Adaptations to research protocols and intervention delivery strategies are needed to prioritize the psychological safety of families, particularly for groups that have been historically stigmatized.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: This study aims to understand the factors influencing engagement with out-patient services from pregnancy to 1 year postpartum among women in recovery from opioid use disorders (OUD). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews and a brief survey with 20 mothers in OUD recovery recruited from health care and community organizations in Western MA. Transcripts were coded by two independent coders and analyzed using a qualitative descriptive approach. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The average duration of any addiction treatment among the 20 participants was 5.6 years with 80% receiving medication-assisted treatment during a pregnancy. Approximately two-thirds experienced relapse during pregnancy or the first year postpartum. We identified 3 themes elucidating women’s experiences around service engagement: “How I see myself” (personal development), “How services see me” (service delivery quality), and “Are you with me?” Personal development included response to past trauma, coping strategies and self-advocacy, and adjusting to parenthood. Service delivery quality was influenced by service design, efficacy of individual providers, and cultural norms (organizational and societal). In the final theme, intersection of individual and service-level factors influenced the degree and quality of the women’s experience engaging with services. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Women describe successful engagement when they experience service providers as being emotionally supportive, delivering relevant services, and advocating on their behalf. To best support and engage families affected by OUD, relevant and timely services should be linked with compassionate delivery.