BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Individuals who engage in illicit or nonmedical opioid use may have elevated risk of health and social consequences, including progression to opioid use disorder (OUD). Preventive interventions to reduce this risk are lacking. This trial tested the impact of a primary care-integrated collaborative care approach for reducing risky opioid use, defined as nonmedical use of prescription opioids or any use of illicit opioids. DESIGN:Cluster-randomized controlled trial randomized primary care providers (PCPs) and their patients into the Subthreshold Opioid Use Disorder Prevention (STOP) intervention or enhanced usual care (EUC). SETTING:Primary care clinics at 5 U.S. sites. PARTICIPANTS:PCPs and their patients were recruited January 2021-May 2023. A total of 119 PCP clusters (STOP = 48, EUC = 51) and 202 patients (STOP = 88, EUC = 114) enrolled. Eligible patients were adults (≥18 years) having current risky opioid use, without moderate-severe OUD. Patient participants were majority female (63.4%), white (70.8%) and non-Hispanic (96.5%), with a mean age of 55.7 [standard deviation (SD) = 12.7] years. At baseline, 63.4% of participants had moderate-severe pain (Brief Pain Inventory) and below average physical (79.2%) and mental (62.4%) health (SF-12). INTERVENTIONS:The STOP collaborative care intervention consisted of brief advice from the PCP about reducing risky opioid use, meetings with a clinic-embedded nurse care manager over 12 months and remote health coaching (2-6 sessions). Both groups received primary care treatment as usual and overdose risk reduction materials. MEASUREMENTS:The primary outcome was total days of risky opioid use, recorded from 6 monthly electronic surveys. A key secondary outcome was moderate-severe OUD at 6 and 12 months. FINDINGS:A total of 77 (87.5%) STOP and 107 (93.9%) EUC participants completed the 6-month assessment period. The primary outcome analysis used the Intention-to-Treat sample with multiple imputations of missing data. Mean days of risky opioid use at 180 days were lower in STOP than EUC [12.2 (SD = 27.73) vs. 15.5 (SD = 32.64)]; the difference between groups adjusted for baseline risky opioid use was not statistically significant (rate ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval = 0.52-1.74). One STOP participant (1.1%) and 13 EUC participants (11.4%) developed moderate-severe OUD at 6 months, and 3 (3.4%) STOP and 6 (5.3%) EUC participants had moderate-severe OUD at 12 months (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:This cluster-randomized controlled trial did not find evidence that the STOP intervention for reducing risky opioid use produced greater reductions over 6 months compared with enhanced usual care, though fewer intervention participants progressed to moderate-severe opioid use disorder. Patients had a high burden of pain and comorbidities that may present challenges to reducing opioid use.

Background: The Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription Medication, and Other Substance (TAPS) tool is a screening and brief assessment instrument to identify unhealthy tobacco, alcohol, drug use, and prescription medication use in primary care patients. This secondary analysis compares the TAPS tool to the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) for alcohol screening. Methods: Adult primary care patients (1124 female, 874 male) completed the TAPS tool followed by AUDIT-C. Performance of each instrument was evaluated against a reference standard measure, the modified World Mental Health Composite International Diagnostic Interview, to identify problem use and alcohol use disorder (AUD). Area under the curve (AUC) appraised discrimination, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated for Youden optimal score thresholds. Results: For identifying problem use: On the AUDIT-C, AUC was 0.90 (95% Confidence Interval: 0.86-0.92) for females and 0.91 (0.89-0.93) for males. Sensitivity and specificity for females were 0.89 (0.83-0.93) and 0.78 (0.75-0.80), respectively, and for males were 0.84 (0.79-0.88) and 0.82 (0.79-0.85). On the TAPS tool, AUC was 0.82 (0.79-0.86) for females and 0.81 (0.78-0.84) for males. Sensitivity and specificity for females were 0.78 (0.72-0.84) and 0.78 (0.75-0.81), respectively, and for males were 0.76 (0.71-0.81) and 0.76 (0.72-0.79). For AUD: On the AUDIT-C, AUC was 0.90 (0.88-0.93) for both females and males. Sensitivity and specificity for females were 0.83 (0.74-0.90) and 0.83 (0.80-0.85), respectively, while for males, they were 0.81 (0.74-0.87) and 0.84 (0.81-0.87). On the TAPS tool, AUC was 0.84 (0.80-0.89) for females and 0.82 (0.78-0.86) for males. Sensitivity and specificity for females were 0.73 (0.63-0.81) and 0.85 (0.83-0.88), respectively, while for males, they were 0.75 (0.68-0.81) and 0.84 (0.81-0.86). Conclusion: The AUDIT-C performed somewhat better than the TAPS tool for alcohol screening. However, the TAPS tool had an acceptable level of performance for alcohol screening and may be advantageous in practice settings seeking to identify alcohol and other substance use with a single instrument.

BackgroundA majority of the 8.9 million Americans with opioid misuse have mild or no symptoms of opioid use disorder (OUD), but they may be at elevated risk of developing more severe OUD, overdose, or other health consequences of opioid use. The "Subthreshold Opioid Use Disorder Prevention"(STOP) Trial is evaluating a collaborative care intervention for risky opioid use in primary care. Here, we describe baseline characteristics of participants to understand their needs and assess the generalizability of the sample.MethodsRecruitment at five primary care sites spanned March 2021-May 2023. Adult patients who screened positive for subthreshold OUD (current illicit or non-medical opioid use without meeting DSM-5 criteria for moderate-severe OUD) were eligible. Baseline assessments measured self-reported demographic characteristics, other substance use, pain, and physical and mental health symptoms. Descriptive statistics summarize characteristics of the enrolled sample across sites.ResultsAmong the 202 participants, the majority identified as female (63.4%), white (70.8%), and non-Hispanic (96.5%), with mean age 55.7 (SD: 12.7) years. Nearly half (49.0%) had problem or high-risk use of prescription opioids, and most received a prescription for opioid medication in the past six months (74.8%). Many participants reported current problem use or high-risk use of alcohol (47.0%) or cannabis (31.2%). Approximately one-third endorsed mental health symptoms, including moderate-severe anxiety (35.6%), depression (31.2%), or sleep disturbance (29.7%), and 20.3% reported a past suicide attempt. In the prior six months, 14.7% had experienced a nonfatal overdose. Moderate-severe pain was reported by 63.4%, and 60.4% rated their general health as fair or poor.ConclusionsPatients with subthreshold OUD had high rates of polysubstance use and comorbidities that may present challenges to reducing risky opioid use. The STOP trial presents an opportunity to detect and address subthreshold OUD in a cohort with considerable medical and social needs, within primary care settings.Clinical trials registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04218201

Introduction: Screening for unhealthy alcohol and drug use is recommended in primary care, and effective implementation requires understanding patients’ perspectives. Failure to identify and address potential differences in attitudes toward screening across demographic groups may result in care gaps, but research examining this is limited. Methods: We surveyed 977 adult patients in 9 primary care clinics that participated in a screening implementation study. The survey collected demographics and attitudes toward screening/discussion of alcohol/drug use in primary care. We described responses overall and compared across age, gender, race, and ethnicity using Chi-square/Fisher’s exact tests. Results: Mean age was 51.1 years, and the sample was 39% male, 61% female, 72% White non-Hispanic, 11% Hispanic, 10% Black non-Hispanic, and 6% other/unknown race non-Hispanic. Most participants across all demographic groups reported supportive attitudes. Comfort reporting drug use was lower among young, male, Black non-Hispanic, and Hispanic patients, and comfort with screening overall was lower among middle-aged, Black non-Hispanic, and Hispanic patients. Conclusions: Results suggest that screening/discussion of alcohol/drug use in primary care is generally highly acceptable to patients across demographic groups. Strategies are needed to increase comfort and alleviate concerns about how medical information will be used, particularly among middle-aged, Black, and Hispanic patients.

BACKGROUND:Lifesaving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) exist; however, most people with opioid use disorder (OUD) do not receive treatment. Hospitalization is one important opportunity to engage people with OUD and offer treatment, including MOUD. Between 2018 and 2020, 6 public hospitals in New York City launched the "Consult for Addiction Treatment and Care in Hospitals" (CATCH) program to provide interprofessional addiction consult services to hospitalized patients. METHODS:This qualitative study aims to add perspectives from 30 racially and ethnically diverse people with opioid-related diagnoses who were hospitalized at a CATCH hospital between October 2019 and April 2021. We used purposive sampling to recruit demographically diverse individuals who accepted or declined aspects of CATCH services. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded for emergent themes using grounded theory techniques. The framework of structural vulnerability was utilized to highlight how social context impacts patients' experiences of healthcare, and in turn affects their addiction trajectories. RESULTS:Participants overwhelmingly accepted MOUD to manage withdrawal symptoms during hospitalization, and many planned to continue MOUD after discharge. Participants appreciated the interprofessional support of CATCH teams which included medical providers, social workers, addiction counselors, and peers. While participants felt that CATCH made holistic addiction treatment including MOUD more accessible, structural issues created barriers to continuing treatment long term. Some participants still felt stigmatized or "punished" for their drug use by non-CATCH providers. CONCLUSION:CATCH met an urgent need for nonjudgmental care and medical management of opioid withdrawal. Additional interventions that address broader needs, including housing and social supports, as well as trust-building healthcare encounters for patients who have been historically marginalized, are needed to meet the public health goal of preventing overdose and reducing drug-related morbidity for this population.

Objectives We explored medications for opioid use disorder treatment (MOUD) utilization in six New York City public hospitals that implemented the “Consultation for Addiction Care and Treatment in Hospitals (CATCH)” program. Methods CATCH rolled out between October 2018 and February 2020. Data from the electronic health record were analyzed for the first year post-implementation. Eligible cases included adults with an opioid-related diagnosis admitted to inpatient departments served by CATCH, with a stay of ≥1 night. Patients were classified as receiving an MOUD order if there was at least 1 order of buprenorphine, methadone, or naltrexone. Logistic regression modeled the impact of CATCH consults on MOUD orders, controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics with hospital as a random effect. Result Among 2117 eligible patients, 71.4% were male, with a mean age of 51.2 years, and 27.2% identified as Black, 21.2% as White, and 34.5% as Hispanic. MOUD was ordered in 60.9% of admissions, and 41.5% had a completed CATCH consult. Patients identified as Black had lower odds of receiving a MOUD order than those identified as White (OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.38–0.71; P < 0.001). Patients with a CATCH consult had higher odds of receiving a MOUD order (OR: 3.22, 95% CI: 2.54–4.07; P < 0.001). Conclusion Majority of patients in our sample received a MOUD order, with higher odds among those with a CATCH consult. Further research is needed on the drivers of racial disparities in MOUD, and other contextual, organizational, and population-specific barriers and facilitators contributing to receipt of hospital-based addiction consult services and MOUD.

Importance:With acute care utilization and mortality rates increasing among people with opioid use disorder, hospital addiction consult services can provide an important touchpoint for care, potentially leading to improved outcomes. Objective:To study the effectiveness of interprofessional hospital addiction consultation services on postdischarge acute care utilization and mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized implementation and effectiveness (hybrid type 1) clinical trial, 6 New York City public hospitals were randomized to an intervention start date, and outcomes were compared during treatment as usual (TAU) and intervention conditions. Participants included adults with hospitalizations identified in Medicaid claims data between October 2017 and January 2021. Eligible patients had an admission or discharge diagnosis of opioid use disorder or opioid poisoning or adverse effects, were hospitalized at least 1 night in a medical or surgical inpatient unit, and were not receiving medication for opioid use disorder before hospitalization. Intervention:Hospitals implemented the Consult for Addiction Treatment and Care in Hospitals (CATCH) program, an interprofessional inpatient addiction consult service providing specialty care for substance use disorders, with teams consisting of a medical clinician, social worker or addiction counselor, and peer counselor. Main Outcomes and Measures:Acute care utilization (hospitalizations and emergency department [ED] visits) and mortality rates (all-cause deaths, overdose deaths, and opioid-involved overdose deaths) 1 year after hospital discharge. Data for the eligible patients were analyzed July 2023 to September 2024. Results:In total, 1355 eligible admissions were identified (968 [71.4%] men; mean [SD] age, 46.6 [12.4] years). A majority of patients (835 [61.5%]) had at least 1 subsequent hospitalization or ED visit. There were 113 deaths, including 34 overdose deaths (30.1%), of which 28 (82.4%) involved opioids. ED admissions were lower in the intervention period compared with TAU (incidence rate ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.72-0.88]; P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences between CATCH and TAU periods in numbers of hospitalizations (incidence rate ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.87-1.13]) or mortality (eg, hazard ratio for all-cause death, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.98-1.92]). Conclusions and Relevance:In this prespecified secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, postdischarge ED visits decreased with the CATCH program, highlighting the potential of hospital-based addiction consult services to address needs of patients with opioid use. Nonetheless, high rates of acute care utilization and mortality persisted, underscoring the need for comprehensive care strategies that extend beyond the hospital walls, and addressing the complex health and social needs of individuals with opioid use. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03611335.

With acute care utilization and mortality rates increasing among people with opioid use disorder, hospital addiction consult services can provide an important touchpoint for care, potentially leading to improved outcomes. To study the effectiveness of interprofessional hospital addiction consultation services on postdischarge acute care utilization and mortality. In this pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized implementation and effectiveness (hybrid type 1) clinical trial, 6 New York City public hospitals were randomized to an intervention start date, and outcomes were compared during treatment as usual (TAU) and intervention conditions. Participants included adults with hospitalizations identified in Medicaid claims data between October 2017 and January 2021. Eligible patients had an admission or discharge diagnosis of opioid use disorder or opioid poisoning or adverse effects, were hospitalized at least 1 night in a medical or surgical inpatient unit, and were not receiving medication for opioid use disorder before hospitalization. Hospitals implemented the Consult for Addiction Treatment and Care in Hospitals (CATCH) program, an interprofessional inpatient addiction consult service providing specialty care for substance use disorders, with teams consisting of a medical clinician, social worker or addiction counselor, and peer counselor. Acute care utilization (hospitalizations and emergency department [ED] visits) and mortality rates (all-cause deaths, overdose deaths, and opioid-involved overdose deaths) 1 year after hospital discharge. Data for the eligible patients were analyzed July 2023 to September 2024. In total, 1355 eligible admissions were identified (968 [71.4%] men; mean [SD] age, 46.6 [12.4] years). A majority of patients (835 [61.5%]) had at least 1 subsequent hospitalization or ED visit. There were 113 deaths, including 34 overdose deaths (30.1%), of which 28 (82.4%) involved opioids. ED admissions were lower in the intervention period compared with TAU (incidence rate ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.72-0.88]; P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences between CATCH and TAU periods in numbers of hospitalizations (incidence rate ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.87-1.13]) or mortality (eg, hazard ratio for all-cause death, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.98-1.92]). In this prespecified secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, postdischarge ED visits decreased with the CATCH program, highlighting the potential of hospital-based addiction consult services to address needs of patients with opioid use. Nonetheless, high rates of acute care utilization and mortality persisted, underscoring the need for comprehensive care strategies that extend beyond the hospital walls, and addressing the complex health and social needs of individuals with opioid use. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03611335

ABSTRACT:People with substance use disorders (SUDs) are increasingly admitted to general hospitals; however, many hospital systems lack both formal structures and skilled staff to provide high-quality care for inpatients with SUDs. Inpatient addiction consult services (ACSs), which are increasingly being implemented around the country, are an evidence-based strategy to add focused care for people with SUDs into the general medical setting. In 2018, New York City Health + Hospitals (H + H) launched an ACS program called Consult for Addiction Care and Treatment in Hospitals in six hospitals, supported by a team of addiction consult experts to deliver teaching and technical assistance (TTA) for the Consult for Addiction Care and Treatment in Hospitals ACSs. This commentary describes the TTA, which included site visits, introductory educational lectures, case conferences, ad hoc support, implementation assistance, and the creation of an addiction care guide. Similar TTA services could be used in the future when hospitals or systems want to launch novel clinical programs.

Introduction Methadone and buprenorphine are effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), yet they are vastly under-utilized across US hospitals. To inform a national trial assessing the effectiveness of implementation strategies to increase adoption of an inpatient hospital-based opioid treatment (HBOT) model (NCT04921787), we explored barriers and facilitators to expanding medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) within community hospitals across the United States. Methods From November 2021 to March 2022, we used purposeful and snowball sampling to identify and interview participants involved in inpatient care of patients with OUD from twelve community hospitals. We conducted semi-structured interviews on providers' experiences and perspectives on current treatment approaches as well as potential influences on MOUD expansion in their hospitals. We used thematic analysis to identify key barriers and facilitators that could impact implementation of an HBOT model, and organized these findings based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results From qualitative interviews with 57 participants (30 physicians, 7 pharmacists, 6 nurses, and 14 professionals involved in the care of patients with OUD) we identified key barriers and facilitators mapped to CFIR's internal and outer settings. The most salient inner setting domains included tension for change and relative priority, compatibility, available resources, organizational culture, access to knowledge and information, relational connections and communications, and information technology infrastructure. Outer setting domains included policies and laws, financing, and partnerships and connections. Conclusions Identifying potential barriers and facilitators can inform hospital-specific strategies to support implementation of HBOT. Implementation strategies that address barriers such as staff availability, knowledge, and attitudes may support increased HBOT adoption. On a broader scale, national policy changes such as increased financing and public reporting of quality metrics would address other barriers we identified and may also encourage hospitals to adopt HBOT models.

BackgroundIndividuals with opioid use disorder have high rates of hospital admissions, which represent a critical opportunity to engage patients and initiate medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). However, few patients receive MOUD and, even if MOUD is initiated in the hospital, patients may encounter barriers to continuing MOUD in the community.ObjectiveDescribe hospital providers' experiences and perspectives to inform initiatives and policies that support hospital-based MOUD initiation and continuation in community treatment programs.DesignAs part of a broader implementation study focused on inpatient MOUD (NCT#04921787), we conducted semi-structured interviews with hospital providers.ParticipantsFifty-seven hospital providers from 12 community hospitals.ApproachThematic analysis examined an emergent topic on challenges transitioning patients to outpatient MOUD treatment and related impacts on MOUD initiation by inpatient providers.Key ResultsParticipants described structural barriers to transitioning hospitalized patients to continuing outpatient MOUD including (a) limited outpatient buprenorphine prescriber availability, (b) the siloed nature of addiction treatment, and (c) long wait times. As a result of observing these structural barriers, participants experienced a sense of futility that deterred them from initiating MOUD. Participants proposed strategies that could better support these patient transitions, including developing partnerships between hospitals and outpatient addiction treatment and supporting in-reach services from community providers.ConclusionsWe identified concerns about inadequate and inaccessible community-based care and transition pathways that discouraged hospital providers from prescribing MOUD. As hospital-based opioid treatment models continue to expand, programmatic and policy strategies to support inpatient transitions to outpatient addiction treatment are needed.NCT Trial Number04921787.

ImportanceMedications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are highly effective, but only 22% of individuals in the US with opioid use disorder receive them. Hospitalization potentially provides an opportunity to initiate MOUD and link patients to ongoing treatment.ObjectiveTo study the effectiveness of interprofessional hospital addiction consultation services in increasing MOUD treatment initiation and engagement.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized implementation and effectiveness (hybrid type 1) trial was conducted in 6 public hospitals in New York, New York, and included 2315 adults with hospitalizations identified in Medicaid claims data between October 2017 and January 2021. Data analysis was conducted in December 2023. Hospitals were randomized to an intervention start date, and outcomes were compared during treatment as usual (TAU) and intervention conditions. Bayesian analysis accounted for the clustering of patients within hospitals and open cohort nature of the study. The addiction consultation service intervention was compared with TAU using posterior probabilities of model parameters from hierarchical logistic regression models that were adjusted for age, sex, and study period. Eligible participants had an admission or discharge diagnosis of opioid use disorder or opioid poisoning/adverse effects, were hospitalized at least 1 night in a medical/surgical inpatient unit, and were not receiving MOUD before hospitalization.InterventionsHospitals implemented an addiction consultation service that provided inpatient specialty care for substance use disorders. Consultation teams comprised a medical clinician, social worker or addiction counselor, and peer counselor.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe dual primary outcomes were (1) MOUD treatment initiation during the first 14 days after hospital discharge and (2) MOUD engagement for the 30 days following initiation.ResultsOf 2315 adults, 628 (27.1%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 47.0 (12.4) years. Initiation of MOUD was 11.0% in the Consult for Addiction Treatment and Care in Hospitals (CATCH) program vs 6.7% in TAU, engagement was 7.4% vs 5.3%, respectively, and continuation for 6 months was 3.2% vs 2.4%. Patients hospitalized during CATCH had 7.96 times higher odds of initiating MOUD (log-odds ratio, 2.07; 95% credible interval, 0.51-4.00) and 6.90 times higher odds of MOUD engagement (log-odds ratio, 1.93; 95% credible interval, 0.09-4.18).ConclusionsThis randomized clinical trial found that interprofessional addiction consultation services significantly increased postdischarge MOUD initiation and engagement among patients with opioid use disorder. However, the observed rates of MOUD initiation and engagement were still low; further efforts are still needed to improve hospital-based and community-based services for MOUD treatment.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03611335

BACKGROUND:In response to the heavy burden of untreated substance use disorders (SUD) in hospital patients, many health systems are implementing addiction consult services staffed by interprofessional teams that diagnose SUD, make recommendations for SUD care in the hospital, and link patients to post-discharge treatment. In 2018, the New York City public hospital system began rolling out the Consult for Addiction Treatment and Care in Hospitals (CATCH) program in six hospitals. CATCH teams are comprised of an addiction-trained medical provider, social worker or addiction counselor, and peer counselor. METHODS:The study conducted qualitative interviews with CATCH staff at all six participating hospitals as part of a pragmatic trial studying the effectiveness and implementation of CATCH. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) framework guided interviews conducted from 2018 to 2021 with 26 staff at the start of implementation and with 33 staff 9-12 months post-implementation. The study team created a codebook a priori and further refined it through additional coding of initial interviews. Codes were systematically analyzed using the CFIR. RESULTS:Barriers and facilitators spanned four CFIR domains: inner setting, outer setting, process, and individual characteristics. Barriers identified were primarily related to the outer and inner settings, including patient characteristics and limited resources (e.g. medical comorbidities, homelessness), insurance, CATCH team role confusion, and infrastructure deficits (e.g., availability of physical space). Additional barriers related to process (workload burden), and characteristics of individuals (stigma and lack of comfort treating SUD among medical teams). Facilitators were mostly related to the characteristics of individuals on the CATCH team (advantages and expertise of the CATCH peer counselor, CATCH team communication and cohesiveness) and inner setting (CATCH team relationships with hospital staff, hospital leadership buy-in and support, and infrastructure). Community networks (outer setting) and CATCH training resources (process) were also facilitators of program implementation. CONCLUSION:Addiction consult services have great potential for improving care for hospital patients with SUD, but as new programs in busy hospital settings they face barriers to implementation that could impact their effectiveness. Barriers may be particularly impactful for programs operating in safety-net hospitals, given limited resources within the health system and the multiple and complex needs of their patients. Understanding the strengths of these programs as well as the barriers to their implementation is critical to utilizing addiction consult services effectively.