Search

Chronic pain, pain catastrophizing, and mental health disorders such as anxiety or depression frequently occur together and are challenging to treat. To help understand the relationship between these conditions, we sought to identify distinct phenotypes associated with worse pain and function. In a cohort of people with chronic pain on opioids seeking medical cannabis in New York, we conducted latent class analysis to identify clusters of participants based on pain catastrophizing and mental health symptoms of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We then compared clusters with respect to sociodemographic and clinical characteristics using descriptive statistics. Among 185 participants, we identified four discrete groups: low pain catastrophizing and low mental health symptoms (49% of participants), low pain catastrophizing and ADHD-predominant mental health symptoms (11%), high pain catastrophizing and anxiety-predominant mental health symptoms (11%), and high pain catastrophizing and high mental health symptoms (30%). The group with high pain catastrophizing and high mental health symptoms had the worst pain intensity and interference, disability, insomnia, and quality of life, compared to the two groups with lower pain catastrophizing, though not all differences were statistically significant. Our findings highlight the importance of identifying and addressing pain catastrophizing in patients with comorbid chronic pain and mental health symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care provider skills such as screening, longitudinal monitoring, and medication management are generalizable to prescribing alcohol use disorder (AUD) pharmacotherapy. The association between primary care engagement (i.e., longitudinal utilization of primary care services) and prescribing of AUD pharmacotherapy is unknown. Methods: We examined a 5-year (2010–2014) retrospective cohort of patients with AUD, 18 years and older, at an urban academic medical center in the Bronx, NY, USA. Our main exposure was level of primary care engagement (no primary care, limited primary care, and engaged with primary care) and our outcome was any AUD pharmacotherapy prescription within 2 years of AUD diagnosis. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined the association between primary care engagement and pharmacotherapy prescribing, accounting for demographic and clinical factors. Results: Of 21,159 adults (28.9% female) with AUD, 2.1% (n = 449) were prescribed pharmacotherapy. After adjusting for confounders, the probability of receiving an AUD pharmacotherapy prescription for patients with no primary care was 1.61% (95% CI 1.39, 1.84). The probability of AUD pharmacotherapy prescribing was 2.56% (95% CI 2.06, 3.06) for patients with limited primary care and 2.89% (95% CI 2.44, 3.34%) for patients engaged with primary care. Conclusions: The percentage of AUD patients prescribed AUD pharmacotherapy was low; however, primary care engagement was associated with a higher, but modest, probability of receiving a prescription. Efforts to increase primary care engagement among patients with AUD may translate into increased AUD pharmacotherapy prescribing; however, strategies to increase prescribing across health care settings are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Illicit drug use (DU) and hazardous drinking (HD) among marginalized populations may be associated with greater barriers to care.Methods: We used baseline data on the participants of the Seek, Test, Treat, and Retain data harmonization initiative. DU includes use of any illicit drugs within the past 6 months. HD was defined as scores ≥8 for men and ≥ 7 for women on Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test within the past 12 months. Social support scores were assigned by summing scores from individual questions related to social support. Two outcomes for multivariable regression models and mediation analysis were perceived access to care and perceived barriers to care scores, calculated from summated points from individual questions within each domain. All models were adjusted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and social support and stratified by HIV status.Results: Among 1403 illicit drug users and 4984 non-drug users, the mean age was 39.6 ± 12.2 years old, 71% were male, 57% African Americans, and 39% Hispanic/Latinos. Over 25% reported difficulties in covering medical costs and finding transportation to health care facilities and greater proportions of drug users and hazardous drinkers reported these issues than non-DU/non-HD. In multivariable models, DU and HD were both independently associated with having greater barriers to care (β: 0.49 (95% confidence interval: 0.19 to 0.79) p < 0.01; 0.31 (0.18 to 0.45) < 0.01) in HIV-negative participants. Neither DU nor HD was strongly associated with barriers to care for HIV-positive participants. Social support was associated with better perceived access to care and fewer barriers to care in the HIV-negative participants.Conclusion: The current study found that financial burdens of care, logistical difficulties in accessing care, and low social support were common challenges among individuals using illicit drugs and/or drinking hazardously. Addressing structural barriers and strengthening social support may be important strategies to improve health care among marginalized populations, regardless of HIV status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a research work on the percentage of opioid treatment programs offering on-site testing over time. Opioid dependence is a risk factor for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), sexually transmitted infections (STI) and hepatitis C virus infection. Information on opioid treatment programs in the U.S. is presented. It concludes that the proportion of U.S. opioid treatment programs offering on-site testing declined between 2000 and 2011.

Background: Opioid tapering is increasingly utilized by providers to decrease risks of chronic opioid therapy, but it is unknown whether tapering is associated with termination of care.Objective: To determine whether patients taking chronic opioid therapy who experienced opioid tapers were at greater risk of subsequently terminating their care compared with those who were continued on their doses.Design: Retrospective cohort study of patients in a large, urban health system between 2008 and 2012 with 2 years of follow-up.Participants: Adult patients prescribed a stable baseline dose of chronic opioid therapy of at least 25 morphine milligram equivalents per day during a baseline year.Main Measures: An opioid taper during an exposure year, defined as a reduction in the average daily dose of at least 30% from the baseline dose in both of the two 6-month periods in the year following the baseline year. Opioid dose continuation was defined as any increase in dose, no change in dose, or any decrease up to 30% compared with baseline dose in the exposure year. The primary outcome was termination of care, defined as no outpatient encounters in the health system, in the year following the exposure year.Key Results: Of 1624 patients on chronic opioid therapy, 207 (15.5%) experienced an opioid taper and 78 (4.8%) experienced termination of care. Compared with opioid dose continuation, opioid taper was significantly associated with termination of care (AOR 4.3 [95% CI 2.2-8.5]).Conclusions: Opioid taper is associated with subsequent termination of care. These findings invite caution and demonstrate the need to fully understand the risks and benefits of opioid tapers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To describe neurocognitive function among opioid-dependent adults seeking buprenorphine treatment and to explore the impact of lifetime psychiatric conditions on neurocognitive function. To explore the additive interaction of patient-based characteristics that may help to inform treatment.Design: Cross-sectional assessment of neurocognitive function, substance use, and psychiatric characteristics of adults seeking buprenorphine treatment within substance use treatment centers in New York City.Participants: Thirty-eight opioid-dependent adults seeking buprenorphine treatment.Measurements: A comprehensive battery, which included measures of executive functioning, learning, memory, verbal fluency, attention, processing speed, and motor functioning were administered. The Wide Range Achievement Test-Third Edition, the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, and an audio computer assisted structured interview were also completed. Correlations and independent sample t-tests were used to ascertain group differences.Findings: Thirty-nine percent of participants were impaired in global neurocognitive function (n=15). Over one third were impaired in either: learning (n=28), memory (n=26), executive functioning (n=17), motor functioning (n=17), attention/working memory (n=14) or verbal fluency (n=12). Lifetime history of alcohol dependence was associated with impairment in global neurocognitive, executive functioning, and motor functioning. Lifetime history of cocaine dependence was associated with impairment in executive functioning and motor functioning (all p's<0.05). Major depressive disorder history was not associated with neurocognitive impairment.Conclusions: Among this sample of opioid-dependent adults, there were high rates of global and domain-specific neurocognitive impairment, with severe impairment in learning and memory. Lifetime alcohol and cocaine dependence were associated with greater neurocognitive impairment, particularly in executive functioning. Because executive functioning is critical for decision-making and learning/memory dysfunction may interfere with information encoding, these findings suggest that opioid-dependent adults may require enhanced support for medical decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To determine the effect of a uniform, reduced, default dispense quantity for new opioid analgesic prescriptions on the quantity of opioids prescribed in dentistry practices. Methods We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial within a health system in the Bronx, NY, USA. We randomly assigned three dentistry sites to a 10-tablet default, a 5-tablet default, or no change (control). The primary outcome was the quantity of opioid analgesics prescribed in the new prescription. Secondary outcomes were opioid analgesic reorders and health service utilization within 30 days after the new prescription. We analyzed outcomes from 6 months before implementation through 18 months after implementation. Results Overall, 6,309 patients received a new prescription. Compared with the control site, patients at the 10-tablet-default site had a significantly larger change in prescriptions for 10 tablets or fewer (38.7 percentage points; confidence interval [CI]: 11.5 to 66.0), lower number of tablets prescribed (–3.3 tablets; CI: –5.9 to –0.7), and lower morphine milligram equivalents (MME) prescribed (–14.1 MME; CI: –27.8 to –0.4), which persisted in the 30 days after the new prescription despite a higher percentage of reorders (3.3 percentage points; CI: 0.2 to 6.4). Compared with the control site, patients at the 5-tablet-default site did not have a significant difference in any outcomes except for a significantly higher percentage of reorders (2.6 percentage points; CI: 0.2 to 4.9). Conclusions Our findings further support the efficacy of strategies that lower default dispense quantities, although they indicate that caution is warranted in the selection of the default. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.org ID: NCT03030469. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Appropriate clinical management of opioid withdrawal is a crucial bridge to long‐term treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), because it is a high‐risk time for potential opioid overdose and relapse. We provide a narrative review of evidence‐based opioid withdrawal management strategies applicable to a variety of treatment settings and geographies. The goals of opioid withdrawal management include relieving suffering associated with withdrawal, providing appropriate diagnosis and screening, engaging patients in initiation of OUD treatment, and using harm reduction strategies, all guided by a patient‐centered approach to care. In addition, we discuss complex cases, relapse prevention strategies, and new developments in opioid withdrawal management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased emergency and hospital utilization. The PROUD trial showed that implementation of office-based addiction treatment (OBAT) increased OUD medication treatment compared to usual care, but did not decrease acute care utilization in patients with OUD documented pre-randomization (clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03407638). This paper reports secondary emergency and hospital utilization outcomes in patients with documented OUD in the PROUD trial. This cluster-randomized implementation trial was conducted in 12 clinics from 6 diverse health systems (March 2015-February 2020). Patients who visited trial clinics and had an OUD diagnosis within 3 years pre-randomization were included in primary analyses; secondary analyses added patients with OUD who were new to the clinic or with newly-documented OUD post-randomization. Outcomes included days of emergency care and hospital utilization over 2 years post-randomization. Explanatory outcomes included measures of OUD treatment. Patient-level analyses used mixed-effect regression with clinic-specific random intercepts. Among 1988 patients with documented OUD seen pre-randomization (mean age 49, 53 % female), days of emergency care or hospitalization did not differ between intervention and usual care; OUD treatment also did not differ. In secondary analyses among 1347 patients with OUD post-randomization, there remained no difference in emergency or hospital utilization despite intervention patients receiving 32.2 (95 % CI 4.7, 59.7) more days of OUD treatment relative to usual care. Implementation of OBAT did not reduce emergency or hospital utilization among patients with OUD, even in the sample with OUD first documented post-randomization in whom the intervention increased treatment. • Treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) has the potential to decrease emergency and hospital care. • This study evaluated implementation of a program in which nurses support medication treatment of OUD in primary care. • Although patients entering intervention clinics post-randomization had more OUD treatment but did not have decreased acute care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To describe first-year trajectories of medical cannabis use and identify characteristics associated with patterns of use in a cohort of adults using opioids for chronic pain. Design Latent class trajectory analysis of a prospective cohort study using data on the 14-day frequency of medical cannabis use. Setting A large academic medical center and four medical cannabis dispensaries in the New York City metropolitan area. Subjects Adults with chronic pain using opioids and newly certified for medical cannabis in New York between 2018 and 2020. Methods Using latent class trajectory analysis, we identified clusters of participants based on the 14-day frequency of medical cannabis use. We used logistic regression to determine factors associated with cluster membership, including sociodemographic characteristics, pain, substance use, and mental health symptoms. Results Among 99 participants, the mean age was 53 years; 62% were women, and 52% were White. We identified three clusters of medical cannabis use: infrequent use (n = 30, mean use = 1.5 days/14-day period), occasional use (n = 28, mean = 5.7 days/14-day period), and frequent use (n = 41, mean = 12.1 days/14-day period). Within clusters, use patterns did not vary significantly over 52 weeks. Differences were observed in two sociodemographic variables: Frequent (vs infrequent) use was associated with non-Hispanic White race/ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio 4.54, 95% confidence interval 1.49–14.29), while occasional (vs infrequent) use was associated with employment (adjusted odds ratio 13.84, 95% confidence interval 1.21–158.74). Conclusions Three clusters of medical cannabis use patterns emerged and were stable over time. Results suggest that structural factors related to race/ethnicity and employment may be major drivers of medical cannabis use, even among adults certified for its use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In March 2020, a temporary federal regulatory exemption for opioid treatment programs (OTPs) was issued, allowing for a greater number of take-home methadone doses than was previously permitted. In the same month, to address financial sustainability, New York State (NYS) Medicaid also transitioned to a bundle reimbursement methodology for OTPs. We examined methadone dosing schedules in NYS before and after these regulatory and financing changes. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using NYS OTP patient data from two sources: the client data system for a baseline period (February 2020) and survey data collected after regulatory and financing changes (May 2020 to August 2021, 64 weekly surveys). We compared methadone dosing schedules over time using chi-square tests and Poisson regression. At baseline, data were available for 78% (n=77/99) of OTPs including 90.9% (n=26,225/28,839) of their enrolled patients. During the survey period, 99 OTPs completed 93.1% (n=5901/6336) of weekly surveys, with a mean statewide weekly patient census of 38,904 (SD=1214.5). Between February and May 2020, daily dosing significantly decreased from 55.4% to 16.3% of patients (-39.1 percentage points [95%CI: −39.8 to −38.4]), although it significantly increased subsequently (3.33%/4-weeks [95%CI: 3.28, 3.39]). In addition, weekly-to-monthly dosing significantly increased from 26.9% to 54.5% of patients (27.6 percentage points [95%CI: 26.9, 28.4]), although it significantly decreased subsequently (-1.19%/4-weeks [95%CI: −1.23, −1.15]). Despite large initial changes, we found a trend toward gradual return to more restrictive dosing schedules. OTPs need further support in leveraging new opportunities to improve methadone treatment and outcomes. • As the overdose crisis worsens, providing access to lifesaving methadone is crucial. • Temporary federal regulations revisions allowed methadone take-home flexibilities. • NYS methadone dosing changed in response but changes narrowed over time. • With changes now permanent there is an unprecedented opportunity to transform methadone treatment. • It is essential for public agencies to support programs to leverage this opportunity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hepatitis C and HIV are associated with opioid use disorders (OUD) and injection drug use. Medications for OUD can prevent the spread of HCV and HIV.Objective: To describe the prevalence of documented OUD, as well as receipt of office-based medication treatment, among primary care patients with HCV or HIV.Design: Retrospective observational cohort study using electronic health record and insurance data.Participants: Adults ≥ 18 years with ≥ 2 visits to primary care during the study (2014-2016) at 6 healthcare systems across five states (CO, CA, OR, WA, and MN).Main Measures: The primary outcome was the diagnosis of OUD; the secondary outcome was OUD treatment with buprenorphine or oral/injectable naltrexone. Prevalence of OUD and OUD treatment was calculated across four groups: HCV only; HIV only; HCV and HIV; and neither HCV nor HIV. In addition, adjusted odds ratios (AOR) of OUD treatment associated with HCV and HIV (separately) were estimated, adjusting for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and site.Key Results: The sample included 1,368,604 persons, of whom 10,042 had HCV, 5821 HIV, and 422 both. The prevalence of diagnosed OUD varied across groups: 11.9% (95% CI: 11.3%, 12.5%) for those with HCV; 1.6% (1.3%, 2.0%) for those with HIV; 8.8% (6.2%, 11.9%) for those with both; and 0.92% (0.91%, 0.94%) among those with neither. Among those with diagnosed OUD, the prevalence of OUD medication treatment was 20.9%, 16.0%, 10.8%, and 22.3%, for those with HCV, HIV, both, and neither, respectively. HCV was not associated with OUD treatment (AOR = 1.03; 0.88, 1.21), whereas patients with HIV had a lower probability of OUD treatment (AOR = 0.43; 0.26, 0.72).Conclusions: Among patients receiving primary care, those diagnosed with HCV and HIV were more likely to have documented OUD than those without. Patients with HIV were less likely to have documented medication treatment for OUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tobacco use has emerged as the leading killer of persons living with HIV (PLWH) in the United States. Little is known about the efficacy of tobacco treatment strategies in PLWH. Design: Randomized controlled trial comparing Positively Smoke Free (PSF), an intensive group therapy intervention targeting HIVinfected smokers, to brief advice to quit. All participants were offered a 12-week supply of nicotine patches. Methods: A cohort of 450 PLWH smokers, recruited from HIV-care centers in the Bronx, New York, andWashington, DC, were randomized 1:1 into the PSF or brief advice to quit conditions. PSF is an 8-session program tailored to address the needs and concerns of HIV-infected smokers and delivered by a trained smoking cessation counselor and PLWH ex-smoker peer pair. The primary outcome was biochemically confirmed, 7-day point-prevalence abstinence at 6 months. Results: In the intention to treat analysis, PSF condition subjects had nearly double the quit rate of controls, 13% vs. 6.6% [odds ratio = 2.10 (95% confidence interval = 1.10 to 4.14), P = 0.04], at 3 months, but no significant difference in abstinence was observed at 6 months. PSF participants exhibited lower nicotine dependence and higher self-efficacy to resist smoking temptations at both 3 and 6 months compared with controls. Lower educational attainment, current cocaine use, past use of nicotine patches, and higher distress tolerance were significant predictors of continued smoking at 6 months. Conclusions: These findings suggest a role for group therapy among tobacco treatments for PLWH smokers, but strategies to augment the durability of early effects are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many of the largest COVID-19 outbreaks in the United States have occurred at carceral facilities. Criminal legal system (CLS)-involved individuals typically face structural barriers accessing medical care post-release. Improving COVID-19 testing and education for CLS-involved individuals could improve health outcomes for this vulnerable population and the communities to which they return. Community-based organizations (CBO) and community health workers (CHWs) fill care gaps by connecting CLS-involved individuals with essential re-entry services. The MOSAIC study will: 1) test an onsite CHW-led SARS-CoV-2 testing and education intervention in a reentry CBO and 2) model the cost-effectiveness of this intervention compared to standard care. We will recruit 250 CLS-involved individuals who have left incarceration in the prior 90 days. Participants will be randomized to receive onsite Point-of-Care testing and education (O-PoC) or Standard of Care (SoC). Over one year, participants will complete quarterly questionnaires and biweekly short surveys through a mobile application, and be tested for SARS-CoV-2 quarterly, either at the CBO (O-PoC) or an offsite community testing site (SoC). O-PoC will also receive COVID-19 mitigation counseling and education from the CHW. Our primary outcome is the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 tests performed with results received by participants. Secondary outcomes include adherence to mitigation behaviors and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. The MOSAIC study will offer insight into cost effective strategies for SARS-CoV-2 testing and education for CLS-involved individuals. The study will also contribute to the growing literature on CHW's role in health education, supportive counseling, and building trust between patients and healthcare organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Though direct acting antivirals (DAAs) promise high cure rates, many providers and payers remain concerned about successful treatment for people who use drugs (PWUD), even among those engaged in opioid agonist treatment (OAT). The efficacy of DAAs among PWUD in real-world settings is unclear.Methods: We conducted a cohort study of patients initiating HCV treatment between January 2014 and August 2015 (n=89) at a primary care clinic in the Bronx, NY. Onsite HCV treatment with DAAs was performed by an HCV specialist, with support from a care coordinator funded by the NYC Department of Health. We identified four categories of drug use and drug treatment: (1) no active drug use/not receiving OAT (defined as non-PWUD); (2) no active drug use/receiving OAT; (3) active drug use/not receiving OAT; and (4) active drug use/receiving OAT. The primary outcome was SVR at 12 weeks post-treatment.Results: Overall SVR rates were 95% (n=41/43) for non-PWUD and 96% (n=44/46) for patients actively using drugs and/or receiving OAT [p=0.95]. There were no differences in SVR rates by drug use or drug treatment category. Compared to non-PWUD, those with no active drug use/receiving OAT had 100% SVR (n=15/15; p=1.0), those actively using drugs/not receiving OAT had 90% SVR (n=9/10; p=0.47), and those actively using drugs/receiving OAT had 95% SVR (20/21; p=1.0).Conclusion: Regardless of active drug use or OAT, patients who received DAA therapy at an urban primary care clinic achieved high HCV cure rates. We found no clinical evidence to justify restricting access to HCV treatment for patients actively using drugs and/or receiving OAT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Among health care providers, prescription of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been low. Little is known specifically about primary care physicians (PCPs) with regard to PrEP awareness and adoption (i.e., prescription or referral), and factors associated with adoption.Objective: To assess PrEP awareness, PrEP adoption, and factors associated with adoption among PCPs.Design: Cross-sectional online survey conducted in April and May 2015.Respondents: Members of a national professional organization for academic primary care physicians (n = 266).Main Measures: PrEP awareness, PrEP adoption (ever prescribed or referred a patient for PrEP [yes/no]), provider and practice characteristics, and self-rated knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs associated with adoption.Key Results: The survey response rate was 8.6 % (266/2093). Ninety-three percent of respondents reported prior awareness of PrEP. Of these, 34.9 % reported PrEP adoption. In multivariable analysis of provider and practice characteristics, compared with non-adopters, adopters were more likely to provide care to more than 50 HIV-positive patients (vs. 0, aOR = 6.82, 95 % CI 2.06-22.52). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were also more likely to report excellent, very good, or good self-rated PrEP knowledge (15.1 %, 33.7 %, 30.2 % vs. 2.5 %, 18.1 %, 23.8 %, respectively; p < 0.001) and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe (35.1 % vs. 10.7 %; p = 0.002). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were less likely to perceive PrEP as being moderately likely to increase risk behaviors ("risk compensation") (12.8 % vs. 28.8 %, p = 0.02).Conclusions: While most respondents were aware of PrEP, only one-third of PrEP-aware PCPs reported adoption. Adopters were more likely to have experience providing HIV care and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe, and were less likely to perceive PrEP use as leading to risk compensation. To enhance PCP adoption of PrEP, educational efforts targeting PCPs without HIV care experience should be considered, as well as training those with HIV care experience to be PrEP "clinical champions". Concerns about safety and risk compensation must also be addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In response to the opioid overdose crisis in the United States, many states implemented policies to guide opioid prescribing, but their impact on overdose mortality (prescription and non-prescription) remains poorly understood. We examined the impact of U.S. state opioid-prescribing policies on opioid overdose mortality following implementation.Methods: We calculated opioid overdose mortality rates from 1999-2016 by U.S. state using the CDC WONDER database, overall and separately for overdose deaths from prescription and non-prescription opioids. For each state, policies active on 1/1/2014 were reviewed for the presence and strength of six provisions recommending judicious opioid prescribing practices; "strong" provisions used the words "should," "shall," or "must". Interrupted time series (ITS) tested the association of each strong provision with overdose mortality, overall and separately for prescription and non-prescription opioids, in the two years following implementation. Sensitivity analyses compared between states, used time-lagged analyses, and excluded synthetic opioids from non-prescription opioid deaths.Results: All six provisions had consistent direction of effect in ITS and sensitivity analyses. Strong provisions for prescriber training and limits on opioid dose reduced the slope of overall and prescription opioid overdose mortality in both ITS and sensitivity analyses. Reduced non-prescription opioid overdose mortality was only associated with strong provision for prescriber training. Some provisions had a negative impact. In ITS, strong provision for prescriber response to misuse increased the slope of non-prescription opioid overdose mortality. Strong provision for mandatory prescription drug monitoring program use had no relationship with overdose mortality in ITS and was associated with increased overall, prescription and non-prescription opioid overdose mortality in between-state sensitivity analysis.Conclusion: Opioid prescribing policies in U.S. states at the peak of the prescription opioid epidemic had modest mortality benefit, and did not reduce non-prescription opioid overdose mortality. A strong provision for prescriber training was the only provision associated with reduced prescription and non-prescription opioid overdose mortality. These findings can inform future efforts addressing prescription drug epidemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We sought to examine characteristics of HIV-positive women with varying levels of engagement in care and care-seeking behaviors. From 2010 to 2013, in a multi-site US-based study of engagement in care among HIV-positive women, we conducted baseline interviews, which included socio-demographic, clinical, and risk behavior characteristics, and barriers to care. We used multinomial logistic regression to compare differences among three distinct categories of 748 women: engaged in care; not engaged in care, but seeking care ('seekers'); and not engaged in care and not seeking care ('non-seekers'). Compared with women in care, seekers were more likely to be uninsured and to report fair or poor health status. In contrast, non-seekers were not only more likely to be uninsured, but, also, to report current high-risk drug use and sexual behaviors, and less likely to report transportation as a barrier to care. Examining care-seeking behaviors among HIV-positive women not engaged in care revealed important differences in high-risk behaviors. Because non-seekers represent a particularly vulnerable population of women who are not engaged in care, interventions targeting this population likely need to address drug use and be community-based given their limited interaction with the health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Recent legislation permits the treatment of opioid-dependent patients with buprenorphine in the primary care setting, opening doors for the development of new treatment models for opioid dependence. We modified national buprenorphine treatment guidelines to emphasize patient self-management by giving patients the opportunity to choose to have buprenorphine inductions at home or the physician''s office. We examined whether patients who had home-based inductions achieved greater 30-day retention than patients who had traditional office-based inductions in a study of 115 opioid-dependent patients treated in an inner-city health center. Retention was similar in both groups: 50 (78.1%) in office-based group versus 40 (78.4%) in home-based group, p = .97. Several patient characteristics were associated with choosing office- versus home-based inductions, which likely influenced these results. We conclude that opioid dependence can be successfully managed in the primary care setting. Approaches that encourage patient involvement in treatment for opioid dependence can be beneficial. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Introduction: The relative neurocognitive effects of the two most common opioid agonist treatments (OAT; buprenorphine and methadone) for opioid use disorder (OUD) are poorly understood. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the neurocognitive effects of OAT (buprenorphine and methadone) and the clinical and sociodemographic characteristics of study samples.Methods: The research team queried PubMed, PsycINFO and Cochrane Reviews for articles (01/1980-01/2020) with terms related to neurocognitive testing in adults (age ≥ 18) prescribed OAT. The team extracted neurocognitive data and grouped them by domain (e.g., executive functioning, learning/memory), and assessed study quality.Results: The search retrieved 2341 abstracts, the team reviewed 278 full articles, and 32 met inclusion criteria. Of these, 31 were observational designs and one was an experimental design. Healthy controls performed better across neurocognitive domains than OAT-treated persons (buprenorphine or methadone). Compared to those with active OUD, OAT-treated persons had better neurocognition in various domains. However, in seven studies comparing buprenorphine- and methadone-treated persons, buprenorphine was associated with better neurocognition than was methadone, with moderate to large effect sizes in executive functioning, attention/working memory, and learning/memory. Additionally, OAT research underreports clinical characteristics and underrepresents Black and Latinx adults, as well as women.Conclusions: Findings suggest that compared to active opioid use, both buprenorphine and methadone treatment are associated with better neurocognitive functioning, but buprenorphine is associated with better executive functioning, attention/working memory, and learning/memory. These findings should be interpreted with caution given widespread methodological heterogeneity, and limited representation of ethnoracially diverse adults and women. Rigorous longitudinal comparisons with more diverse, better characterized samples will help to inform treatment and policy recommendations for persons with OUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite dramatic increases in opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths, the U.S. has been unable to consistently deliver OUD treatment to those who need it. Syringe services programs (SSPs) can engage an out-of-treatment population of people with OUD that has elevated overdose risk. Buprenorphine treatment is safe and effective, and US regulations allow for prescribing from diverse locations, including SSPs. This study's objective is to test buprenorphine treatment initiation at SSPs. We hypothesize that offering onsite buprenorphine treatment initiation will improve OUD treatment engagement without reducing buprenorphine treatment effectiveness or safety. We will recruit 250 out-of-treatment SSP participants with OUD in a large urban area. Participants will be randomized to onsite buprenorphine treatment initiation or enhanced referral. Over 2 weeks, participants in the onsite treatment arm will see a buprenorphine provider twice at the SSP, receive weekly medication packs, and then their care will be transferred to a community health center for treatment continuation. In the control arm, within one week, participants will receive an appointment at the same community health center as in the intervention arm for buprenorphine initiation and continuation. Participants will be assessed with urine drug tests, questionnaires, and medical record review. The primary outcome will be engagement in buprenorphine treatment at 30 days. Secondary outcomes include buprenorphine diversion, opioid-free urine drug tests, and intervention cost-effectiveness. Our study will contribute to the growing literature on SSPs as a conduit to OUD treatment. SSPs hold promise to deliver needed care to people with OUD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Office-based buprenorphine places health care providers in a unique position to combine HIV and drug treatment in the primary care setting. However, federal legislation restricts nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) from prescribing buprenorphine, which may limit its potential for uptake and inhibit the role of these nonphysician providers in delivering drug addiction treatment to patients with HIV. This study aimed to examine the level of interest in prescribing buprenorphine among nonphysician providers. We anonymously surveyed providers attending HIV educational conferences in six large U.S. cities about their interest in prescribing buprenorphine. Overall, 48.6% (n = 92) of nonphysician providers were interested in prescribing buprenorphine. Compared to infectious disease specialists, nonphysician providers (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.22–6.83) and generalist physicians (AOR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.09–3.84) were significantly more likely to be interested in prescribing buprenorphine. NPs and PAs are interested in prescribing buprenorphine. To improve uptake of buprenorphine in HIV settings, the implications of permitting nonphysician providers to prescribe buprenorphine should be further explored. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Inpatient addiction consult services (ACS) lower barriers to accessing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), however not every patient recommended for MOUD links to outpatient care. We hypothesized that fewer days between discharge date and outpatient appointment date was associated with improved linkage to buprenorphine treatment among patients evaluated by an ACS.Methods: We extracted appointment and demographic data from electronic medical records and conducted retrospective chart review of adults diagnosed with opioid use disorder (OUD) evaluated by an ACS in Boston, MA between July 2015 and August 2017. These patients were initiated on or recommended buprenorphine treatment on discharge and provided follow-up appointment at our hospital post-discharge. Multivariable logistic regression assessed whether arrival to the appointment post-discharge was associated with shorter wait-times (0-1 vs. 2+ days).Results: In total, 142 patients were included. Among patients who had wait-times of 0-1 day, 63 % arrived to their appointment compared to wait-times of 2 or more days (42 %). There were no significant differences between groups based on age, gender, distance of residence from the hospital, insurance status, co-occurring alcohol use disorder diagnosis, or discharge with buprenorphine prescription. After adjusting for covariates, patients with 0-1 day of wait-time had 2.6 times the odds of arriving to their appointment [95 % CI 1.3-5.5] compared to patients who had 2+ days of wait-time.Conclusion: For hospitalized patients with OUD evaluated for initiating MOUD, same- and next-day appointments are associated with increased odds of linkage to outpatient MOUD care post-discharge compared to waiting two or more days. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: More than 50 years of high-quality data demonstrate that naloxone is an efficacious and cost-effective overdose reversal agent. Intranasal naloxone is now available in the United States as an over-the-counter and generic medication for the first time since the start of the overdose crisis more than 20 years ago. As the overdose crisis continues to contribute to substantial loss of life, there is an historic opportunity for jurisdictions to expand equitable and sustained access to intranasal naloxone. Further, through simultaneously enacting and expanding effective Naloxone Access and Good Samaritan laws, and equitably implementing these laws, there is the potential to maximize the population-level effectiveness of naloxone to sustainably reduce overdose mortality., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Addiction Medicine.)

Background: Over the past decade, there has been increased utilization of medical cannabis (MC) in the United States. Few studies have described sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with MC use after certification and more specifically, factors associated with use of MC products with different cannabinoid profiles. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal cohort study of adults ( N =225) with chronic or severe pain on opioids who were newly certified for MC in New York State and enrolled in the study between November 2018 and January 2022. We collected data over participants' first 3 months in the study, from web-based assessment of MC use every 2 weeks (unit of analysis). We used generalized estimating equation models to examine associations of sociodemographic and clinical factors with (1) MC use (vs. no MC use) and (2) use of MC products with different cannabinoid profiles. Results: On average, 29% of the participants used predominantly high delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) MC products within the first 3 months of follow-up, 30% used other MC products, and 41% did not use MC products. Non-Hispanic White race, pain at multiple sites, and past 30-day sedative use were associated with a higher likelihood of MC use (vs. no MC use). Current tobacco use, unregulated cannabis use, and enrollment in the study during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with a lower likelihood of MC use (vs. no MC use). Among participants reporting MC use, female gender and older age were associated with a lower likelihood of using predominantly high-THC MC products (vs. other MC products). Conclusion: White individuals were more likely to use MC after certification, which may be owing to access and cost issues. The findings that sedative use was associated with greater MC use, but tobacco and unregulated cannabis were associated with less MC use, may imply synergism and substitution that warrant further research. From the policy perspective, additional measures are needed to ensure equitable availability of and access to MC. Health practitioners should check patients' history and current use of sedative, tobacco, and unregulated cannabis before providing an MC recommendation and counsel patients on safe cannabis use. clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03268551).

Background: Adults living with HIV have disproportionately high chronic pain, prescription opioid use, history of substance use, and incarceration. While incarceration can have long-lasting health impacts, prior studies have not examined whether distant (>1 year prior) incarceration is associated with opioid use for chronic pain, or with opioid misuse or opioid use disorder among people living with HIV and chronic pain., Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of adults living with HIV and chronic pain. The independent variables were any distant incarceration and drug-related distant incarceration (both dichotomous). Dependent variables were current long-term opioid therapy, current opioid misuse, and current opioid use disorder. A series of multivariate logistic regression models were conducted, adjusting for covariates., Results: In a cohort of 148 participants, neither distant incarceration nor drug-related incarceration history were associated with current long-term opioid therapy. Distant incarceration was associated with current opioid misuse (AOR 3.28; 95% CI: 1.41-7.61) and current opioid use disorder (AOR 4.40; 95% CI: 1.54-12.56). Drug-related incarceration history was also associated with current opioid misuse (AOR 4.31; 95% CI: 1.53-12.17) and current opioid use disorder (AOR 7.28; 95% CI: 2.06-25.71)., Conclusions: The positive associations of distant incarceration with current opioid misuse and current opioid use disorder could indicate a persistent relationship between incarceration and substance use in people living with HIV and chronic pain. Additional research on opioid use among formerly incarcerated individuals in chronic pain treatment is needed., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Importance: Few primary care (PC) practices treat patients with medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) despite availability of effective treatments., Objective: To assess whether implementation of the Massachusetts model of nurse care management for OUD in PC increases OUD treatment with buprenorphine or extended-release injectable naltrexone and secondarily decreases acute care utilization., Design, Setting, and Participants: The Primary Care Opioid Use Disorders Treatment (PROUD) trial was a mixed-methods, implementation-effectiveness cluster randomized clinical trial conducted in 6 diverse health systems across 5 US states (New York, Florida, Michigan, Texas, and Washington). Two PC clinics in each system were randomized to intervention or usual care (UC) stratified by system (5 systems were notified on February 28, 2018, and 1 system with delayed data use agreement on August 31, 2018). Data were obtained from electronic health records and insurance claims. An implementation monitoring team collected qualitative data. Primary care patients were included if they were 16 to 90 years old and visited a participating clinic from up to 3 years before a system's randomization date through 2 years after., Intervention: The PROUD intervention included 3 components: (1) salary for a full-time OUD nurse care manager; (2) training and technical assistance for nurse care managers; and (3) 3 or more PC clinicians agreeing to prescribe buprenorphine., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a clinic-level measure of patient-years of OUD treatment (buprenorphine or extended-release injectable naltrexone) per 10 000 PC patients during the 2 years postrandomization (follow-up). The secondary outcome, among patients with OUD prerandomization, was a patient-level measure of the number of days of acute care utilization during follow-up., Results: During the baseline period, a total of 130 623 patients were seen in intervention clinics (mean [SD] age, 48.6 [17.7] years; 59.7% female), and 159 459 patients were seen in UC clinics (mean [SD] age, 47.2 [17.5] years; 63.0% female). Intervention clinics provided 8.2 (95% CI, 5.4-∞) more patient-years of OUD treatment per 10 000 PC patients compared with UC clinics (P = .002). Most of the benefit accrued in 2 health systems and in patients new to clinics (5.8 [95% CI, 1.3-∞] more patient-years) or newly treated for OUD postrandomization (8.3 [95% CI, 4.3-∞] more patient-years). Qualitative data indicated that keys to successful implementation included broad commitment to treat OUD in PC from system leaders and PC teams, full financial coverage for OUD treatment, and straightforward pathways for patients to access nurse care managers. Acute care utilization did not differ between intervention and UC clinics (relative rate, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.47-2.92; P = .70)., Conclusions and Relevance: The PROUD cluster randomized clinical trial intervention meaningfully increased PC OUD treatment, albeit unevenly across health systems; however, it did not decrease acute care utilization among patients with OUD., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03407638.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted health care but it is unknown how it impacted the lives of people using medical cannabis for chronic pain., Objective: To understand the experiences of individuals from the Bronx, NY, who had chronic pain and were certified to use medical cannabis during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: We conducted 1:1 semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews from March through May 2020 with a convenience sample of 14 individuals enrolled in a longitudinal cohort study. We purposively recruited participants with both frequent and infrequent patterns of cannabis use. Interviews addressed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on daily life, symptoms, medical cannabis purchase, and use. We conducted a thematic analysis, with a codebook approach, to identify and describe prominent themes., Results: Participants' median age was 49 years, nine were female, four were Hispanic, four were non-Hispanic White, and four were non-Hispanic Black. We identified three themes: (1) disrupted access to health services, (2) disrupted access to medical cannabis due to the pandemic, and (3) mixed impact of chronic pain on social isolation and mental health. Due to increased barriers to health care in general and to medical cannabis specifically, participants reduced medical cannabis use, stopped use, or substituted medical cannabis with unregulated cannabis. Living with chronic pain both prepared participants for the pandemic and made the pandemic more difficult., Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic amplified pre-existing challenges and barriers to care, including to medical cannabis, among people with chronic pain. Understanding pandemic-era barriers may inform policies in ongoing and future public health emergencies., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The cascade of care for opioid use disorder (OUD) has been described at the population level to inform health policy and in health care systems, programs, and communities to guide targeted interventions. Office-based buprenorphine treatment is essential for expanding access to OUD treatment; however, few studies examine the cascade of care specifically for office-based buprenorphine treatment. Our objective was to describe a cascade of care for patients referred for office-based buprenorphine treatment in the primary care setting., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with OUD who were referred for office-based buprenorphine treatment within a large, urban health care system between 2018 and 2019. Our primary outcomes included completion of each step of the buprenorphine treatment cascade of care: 1) referred for treatment, 2) scheduled initial visit, 3) completed initial visit, 4) initiated buprenorphine treatment, and 5) retained in treatment at 90 days. We constructed a cascade of care by calculating proportions of patients identified at every step, starting with the total number of patients referred for treatment as the first step. We extracted data from the program's referral database and electronic medical record system. We compared characteristics of patients referred who initiated buprenorphine to those referred who did not initiate buprenorphine treatment using chi-squared tests and t-tests. To account for the hierarchical nature of the data, we conducted a Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) modeling to test the differences in attrition rates among the steps of the cascade of care., Results: In the 24-month period between 2018 and 2019, 226 patients were referred for office-based buprenorphine treatment at Montefiore's Buprenorphine Treatment Network. Patients' mean age at referral was 47 years, and most were male (68.6%), Hispanic (49.6%), and publicly insured (75.7%). Among all patients, 182 (80.5%) were scheduled for an initial visit, 142 (62.8%) completed the initial visit, 134 (59.3%) initiated buprenorphine treatment, and 95 (42.0%) were retained in treatment at 90 days. 37.2% of all patients referred did not complete the initial visit. A GEE model showed that attrition is significantly steeper in the first two steps of the cascade of care, compared to the later three steps (AOR = 1.95, 95% CI = 1.31-2.91, p < 0.05). Compared to referred patients who did not initiate treatment, those referred who initiated treatment were more likely to be using non-prescribed buprenorphine at time of referral (19.4% vs. 5.4%, p < 0.05) and be self-referred (22.4% vs. 9.8%, p < 0.05)., Conclusion: Our study is the first to describe a cascade of care for office-based buprenorphine treatment in a large health care system. The study observed the steepest attrition in the first two steps of the cascade of care, where more than a third of patients referred did not complete the initial visit. Patients who were self-referred, or using non-prescribed buprenorphine were more likely to initiate treatment. A cascade of care specific for office-based buprenorphine can inform future efforts to improve linkage to care., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Within the United States (US), because racial/ethnic disparities in cannabis arrests continue, and cannabis legalization is expanding, understanding disparities in availability of legal cannabis services is important. Few studies report mixed findings regarding disparities in availability of legal cannabis services; none examined New York. We examined disparities in availability of medical cannabis services in New York. We hypothesized that New York census tracts with few Black or Hispanic residents, high incomes, high education levels, and greater urbanicity would have more medical cannabis services., Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we used data from the 2018 US Census Bureau 5-year American Community Survey and New York Medical Marijuana Program. Main exposures were census tract characteristics, including urban-rural classification, percentage of Black and Hispanic residents, percentage of residents with bachelor's degrees or higher, and median household income. Main outcomes were presence of at least one medical cannabis certifying provider and dispensary in each census tract. To compare census tracts' characteristics with (vs. without) certifying providers and dispensaries, we used chi-square tests and t-tests. To examine characteristics independently associated with (vs. without) certifying providers, we used multivariable logistic regression., Results: Of 4858 New York census tracts, 1073 (22.1%) had medical cannabis certifying providers and 37 (0.8%) had dispensaries. Compared to urban census tracts, suburban census tracts were 62% less likely to have at least one certifying provider (aOR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.25-0.57). For every 10% increase in the proportion of Black residents, a census tract was 5% less likely to have at least one certifying provider (aOR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.92-0.99). For every 10% increase in the proportion of residents with bachelor's degrees or higher, a census tract was 30% more likely to have at least one certifying provider (aOR = 1.30; 95% CI = 1.21-1.38). Census tracts with (vs. without) dispensaries were more likely to have a higher percentage of residents with bachelor's degrees or higher (43.7% vs. 34.1%, p < 0.005)., Conclusions: In New York, medical cannabis services are least available in neighborhoods with Black residents and most available in urban neighborhoods with highly educated residents. Benefits of legal cannabis must be shared by communities disproportionately harmed by illegal cannabis., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Despite numerous challenges, Montefiore Medical Center in New York City implemented a program aimed at providing comprehensive, evidence-based medical cannabis certifications to patients, including those who have been historically disenfranchised, and shares insights from five years of operation.

Cannabis use in the United States is growing at an unprecedented pace. Most states in the United States have legalized medical cannabis use, and many have legalized nonmedical cannabis use. In this setting, health care professionals will increasingly see more patients who have questions about cannabis use, its utility for medical conditions, and the risks of its use. This narrative review provides an overview of the background, pharmacology, therapeutic use, and potential complications of cannabis., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Chronic pain, pain catastrophizing, and mental health disorders such as anxiety or depression frequently occur together and are challenging to treat. To help understand the relationship between these conditions, we sought to identify distinct phenotypes associated with worse pain and function. In a cohort of people with chronic pain on opioids seeking medical cannabis in New York, we conducted latent class analysis to identify clusters of participants based on pain catastrophizing and mental health symptoms of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We then compared clusters with respect to sociodemographic and clinical characteristics using descriptive statistics. Among 185 participants, we identified four discrete groups: low pain catastrophizing and low mental health symptoms (49% of participants), low pain catastrophizing and ADHD-predominant mental health symptoms (11%), high pain catastrophizing and anxiety-predominant mental health symptoms (11%), and high pain catastrophizing and high mental health symptoms (30%). The group with high pain catastrophizing and high mental health symptoms had the worst pain intensity and interference, disability, insomnia, and quality of life, compared to the two groups with lower pain catastrophizing, though not all differences were statistically significant. Our findings highlight the importance of identifying and addressing pain catastrophizing in patients with comorbid chronic pain and mental health symptoms., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake among women in the United States has been low. To increase uptake, we developed a peer outreach and navigation PrEP intervention. Semi-structured qualitative interviews with 32 cisgender women and 3 transgender women were conducted to assess the intervention. We used a thematic approach to identify barriers to, and facilitators of the intervention. Facilitators included interest in PrEP, offer of health and social services, the intervention's women-focused approach, and peer outreach and navigation. Barriers were perceived HIV risk, concerns about medication side effects or interactions, housing insecurity and travel, co-occurring health-related conditions, and caregiving responsibilities. We recommend that future interventions consider packaging PrEP in local community settings, such as syringe exchange programs; include services such as food and housing assistance; use peers to recruit and educate women; integrate a culturally appropriate women's focus; and consider providing same-day PrEP., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake remains woefully low among U.S. women at high risk for HIV acquisition. We evaluated a pilot intervention which involved Peers providing brief PrEP education and counseling at mobile syringe exchange sites and at sex worker and syringe exchange drop-in centers followed by navigation to PrEP care. Peers recruited English-proficient, self-identified women (i.e., cisgender and transgender women and persons with other transfeminine identities) over a 3-month period and delivered the intervention to 52 HIV-negative/status unknown participants. Thirty-eight participants (73.1%) reported PrEP interest, 27 (51.9%) accepted the offer of a PrEP appointment, 13 (25.0%) scheduled a PrEP appointment, 3 (5.8%) attended an initial PrEP appointment, and none were prescribed PrEP. We found a gap between PrEP interest and connecting women to PrEP care. Further study is needed to understand this gap, including exploring innovative approaches to delivering PrEP care to women at highest risk for HIV.

Background: Syringe services programs (SSPs) complement substance use disorder treatment in providing services that improve the health of people who use drugs (PWUD). Buprenorphine treatment is an effective underutilized opioid use disorder treatment. Regulations allow buprenorphine prescribing from office-based settings, potentially including SSPs although few studies have examined this approach. Our objective was to assess the attitudes among PWUD toward the potential introduction of buprenorphine treatment in an SSP. Methods : In this qualitative study, we recruited 34 participants who were enrolled at a New York City-based SSP to participate in one of seven focus group sessions. The focus group facilitators prompted participants to share their thoughts in five domains: attitudes toward (1) medical clinics; (2) harm reduction in general; (3) SSP-based buprenorphine treatment; (4) potential challenges of SSP-based treatment; and (5) logistical considerations of an SSP-based buprenorphine treatment program. Four researchers analyzed focus group transcripts using thematic analysis. Results : Of the 34 participants, most were white (68%), over the age of 40 years old (56%), and had previously tried buprenorphine (89%). Common themes were: 1) The SSP is a supportive community for people who use drugs; 2) Participants felt less stigmatized at the SSP than in general medical settings; 3) Offering buprenorphine treatment could change the SSP's culture; and 4) SSP participants receiving buprenorphine may be tempted to divert their medication. Participants offered suggestions for a slow intentional introduction of buprenorphine treatment at the SSP including structured appointments, training medical providers in harm reduction, and program eligibility criteria. Conclusion : Overall, participants expressed enthusiasm for onsite buprenorphine treatment at SSPs. Research on SSP-based buprenorphine treatment should investigate standard buprenorphine treatment outcomes but also any effects on the program itself and medication diversion. Implementation should consider cultural and environmental aspects of the SSP and consult program staff and participants.

Objectives: We assessed internal medicine residents' attitudes and clinical practices regarding opioid overdose prevention education and naloxone prescribing as a first step in developing curriculum to train residents on these topics., Methods: We adapted a previously validated questionnaire to assess residents' feelings of responsibility, confidence and clinical practice in opioid overdose prevention and naloxone prescribing., Results: Nearly all 90 residents (62% response rate) felt responsible and most felt confident in: assessing patients for risk of opioid overdose (95% and 57%, respectively), assessing patients' readiness to reduce risk of opioid overdose (95% and 73%, respectively), and advising behavior change to minimize opioid overdose risk (98% and 71%, respectively). Most felt responsible to refer patients for opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment (98%), and provide overdose prevention education and prescribe naloxone (87%). Most felt confident referring patients for OUD treatment (60%), and nearly half felt confident in providing overdose prevention education and prescribing naloxone (45%). In clinical practice, over a third reported assessing patients' risk of overdose (35%), assessing patients' readiness to reduce risk of overdose (57%), and advising behavior change to minimize overdose risk (57%). Only 17% reported providing overdose prevention education and prescribing naloxone., Conclusions: Despite feeling responsible and confident in addressing opioid overdose prevention strategies, few residents report implementing these strategies in clinical care. Residency programs must not only include curricula addressing overdose risk assessment and counseling, referral to or provision of OUD treatment, but also include curricula that impact implementation of opioid overdose prevention strategies.

As more states legalize cannabis for medical use, people increasingly use cannabis to treat medical conditions. Well-documented harms of cannabis use include increased risk of fatal auto accidents, neurocognitive deficits, and increased risk of addiction. Observational data supports the use of cannabis for pain, nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy, and multiple sclerosis spasticity symptoms. Given potential harms versus benefits of cannabis use, how should physicians counsel patients regarding their cannabis use? This paper briefly reviews the evidence supporting medical cannabis use for pain. We consider cannabis use as a harm reduction strategy for pain management. We encourage routine, longitudinal assessments of cannabis use among patients. We discuss the commercialization of cannabis for financial gain, contributing to potent and addictive cannabis. We highlight the concerning phenomena of cannabis dispensary workers as proxy clinicians. Finally, we present three strategies to reduce public harms associated with potent cannabis use including required testing and reporting of tetrahydrocannabinol/cannabidiol concentrations, rigorous study of high-potency cannabis available for purchase in dispensaries across the USA, and large-scale efforts to measure cannabis consumption in medical records so prospective, longitudinal studies can be conducted to correlate consumption measures with medical and psychiatric outcomes.

Primary care physicians (PCPs) are critical for promoting HIV prevention by prescribing pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Yet, there are limited data regarding PCP's preferred approaches for PrEP implementation. In 2015, we conducted an online survey of PCPs' PrEP prescribing and implementation. Participants were general internists recruited from a national professional organization. We examined provider and practice characteristics and perceived implementation barriers and facilitators associated with preferred models for PrEP implementation. Among 240 participants, the majority (85%) favored integrating PrEP into primary care, either by training all providers ("all trained") (42%) or having an onsite PrEP specialist ("on-site specialist") (43%). Only 15% preferred referring patients out of the practice to a specialist ("refer out"). Compared to those who preferred to "refer out," participants who preferred the "all trained" model were more likely to spend most of their time delivering direct patient care and to practice in the Northeast. Compared to participants who preferred the "refer out" or on-site specialist" models, PCPs preferring the all trained model were less likely to perceive lack of clinic PrEP guidelines/protocols as a barrier to PrEP. Most PCPs favored integrating PrEP into primary care by either training all providers or having an on-site specialist. Time devoted to clinical care and geography may influence preferences for PrEP implementation. Establishing clinic-specific PrEP protocols may promote on-site PrEP implementation. Future studies should focus on evaluating the effectiveness of different PrEP implementation models on PrEP delivery., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2019 The Authors.)

: In observational and retrospective studies, people who use cannabis are more likely than people who do not use cannabis to also use other drugs. People who take medical cannabis are also more likely to report medical and non-medical use of opioid analgesics, stimulants, and tranquilizers. Given that people who take medical cannabis and those who do not are likely to have different underlying morbidity, it is possible that medical cannabis use reduces prescription drug use yet prescription drug use remains relatively high. Studies comparing people who take medical cannabis with people who do not take it cannot draw conclusions about the effect of medical cannabis on drug use. To fully understand the effect of medical cannabis on the use of other drugs, prospective longitudinal studies randomizing individuals to cannabis versus other treatments are urgently needed.

HIV-infected persons are more likely to have chronic pain, receive opioid analgesic treatment, receive higher doses of opioids, and to have substance use disorders and mental illness compared with the general population, putting them at increased risk for opioid use disorder. Management of opioid use in HIV-infected individuals can be complex, and the limited data on opioid treatment in this population are conflicting with regard to its effect on HIV outcomes. Buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder improves HIV outcomes and other outcomes. This article summarizes a presentation by Chinazo O. Cunningham, MD, MS at the IAS-USA continuing education program, Improving the Management of HIV Disease, held in Atlanta, Georgia, in March 2017.

Purpose of Review: Migrants living in high-income countries are disproportionately affected by HIV infection and frequently have characteristics associated with poor HIV clinical outcomes. HIV epidemiology among migrants is influenced by changes in migration patterns and variations in transmission risk behaviors. Here we review the recently published literature on known HIV outcomes among migrants from low-income and middle-income countries living in high-income countries., Recent Findings: High proportions of migrants acquire HIV after migration, and this group frequently presents to care late. Once established in care, migrants are often more likely to experience worse HIV treatment outcomes compared with native populations. Multiple individual and structural factors influence HIV diagnosis and treatment outcomes among migrants, including disruption of social networks, increased sexual risk behaviors, communication barriers, limited access to care, and stigma. Few studies have examined interventions targeted at improving HIV outcomes among migrants., Summary: Stigma and limited access to care appear to be primary drivers of poor HIV outcomes among migrants in high-income countries. Addressing these disparities is limited by difficulties in identifying and monitoring this population as well as a lack of evidence regarding appropriate interventions for migrants living with HIV. Improving outcomes for this group requires interventions that are specifically targeted at this marginalized and growing population.

Objectives: Provision of smoking-cessation treatment is limited in office-based buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) settings. This study describes smoking and smoking-cessation behaviors among patients receiving office-based BMT., Methods: Cross-sectional study of patients receiving office-based BMT at a community health center in the Bronx, NY. We interviewed patients assessing sociodemographic, and substance use and tobacco use characteristics, including methods used for smoking cessation. We reported simple frequencies and explored associations of BMT characteristics with smoking behaviors., Results: Of 68 patients, 87.7% were current cigarette smokers, 7.9% were former smokers, and 4.4% had never smoked. Of lifetime smokers, 83.1% reported at least 1 prior quit attempt, and 78.5% had used medication (75.4% used nicotine replacement therapy, 29.2% varenicline, and 9.2% bupropion). Ten patients (15.4%) reported using electronic cigarettes to try to quit smoking. Stopping "cold turkey" (40.0%) and gradually decreasing the number of cigarettes smoked (32.3%) were nonpharmacological methods of quitting tried most often. Use of behavioral support, including stop-smoking programs and counseling, was low. Higher dose and longer duration of BMT was associated with greater smoking frequency., Conclusions: Patients receiving BMT have a high prevalence of cigarette smoking, though most have tried to quit, and have prior experience with pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. Efforts to optimize smoking-cessation treatments among BMT patients are needed.

Pain is highly prevalent among HIV-positive individuals, with women representing a large subset of those with pain. However, little is known about the relationship between pain and retention in HIV medical care. Among a cohort of HIV-positive women of color, we evaluated the association between pain and retention in care, as measured by missed clinic visits. The Health Resources and Services Administration's Women of Color Initiative was a multi-site observational cohort study evaluating demonstration projects to engage HIV-positive women in medical care. From November 2010 to July 2013, 921 women were enrolled in the study across nine U.S. sites; baseline interviews collected data on socio-demographic, clinical, and risk behavior characteristics. Pain was assessed at baseline based on number of days in pain over the last 30 days and was categorized as no pain (0 days), infrequent pain (1-13 days), and frequent pain (14-30 days), with 14 days being the median. Missed visits over the one-year follow-up period, evaluated by chart abstraction, were dichotomized as ≤1 missed visit versus >1 missed visit. We conducted multivariate logistic regression to assess the association between pain at baseline and missed visits, adjusting for pertinent covariates. Among our sample (N = 862), 52.2 % of women reported no pain, 23.7 % reported infrequent pain and 24.1 % reported frequent pain. Forty-five percent had >1 missed visit during the one-year follow-up period. Overall, we did not find a significant association between pain and missed visits (aOR 2.30; 95 % CI 1.00-5.25). However, in planned stratified analyses, among women reporting current substance use at baseline, reporting frequent pain was associated with a higher odds of missed visits as compared with reporting no pain (aOR 15.14; 95 % CI 1.78-128.88). In our overall sample, pain was not significantly associated with missed visits. However, frequent pain was associated with missed visits among HIV-positive women of color who reported substance use at baseline. A better understanding of the relationship between pain and missed visits could guide efforts to improve retention in care in this population.

Background: Routine HIV testing of hospitalized patients is recommended, but few strategies to expand testing in the hospital setting have been described. We assessed the impact of an electronic medical record (EMR) prompt on HIV testing for hospitalized patients., Methods: We performed a pre-post study at 3 hospitals in the Bronx, NY. We compared the proportion of admissions of patients 21-64 years old with an HIV test performed, characteristics of patients tested, and rate of new HIV diagnoses made by screening while an EMR prompt recommending HIV testing was inactive vs. active. The prompt appeared for patients with no previous HIV test or a high-risk diagnosis after their last HIV test., Results: Among 36,610 admissions while the prompt was inactive, 9.5% had an HIV test performed. Among 18,943 admissions while the prompt was active, 21.8% had an HIV test performed. Admission while the prompt was active was associated with increased HIV testing among total admissions [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.78, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.62 to 2.96], those without a previous HIV test (aOR 4.03, 95% CI: 3.70 to 4.40), and those with a previous negative test (aOR 1.52, 95% CI: 1.37 to 1.68) (P < 0.0001 for all). Although the prompt was active, testing increased across all patient characteristics. New HIV diagnoses made by screening increased from 8.2/100,000 admissions to 37.0/100,000 admissions while the prompt was inactive and active, respectively (OR 4.51 95% CI: 1.17 to 17.45, P = 0.03)., Conclusions: An EMR prompt for hospitalized patients was associated with a large increase in HIV testing, a diversification of patients tested, and an increase in diagnoses made by screening.