Don’t Let the COVID-19 Crisis Go to Waste: Breaking Through the Status Quo & Flattening the Opioid Epidemic Curve

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Feler Bose ◽  
Percy Menzies ◽  
Fred Rottnek

Abstract The objective of the paper is to understand the impact of the COVID-19 focusing event that resulted in a distinctive response by the Federal government. The paper focuses on the rapid deregulation that occurred in the opioid use disorder treatments. We frame the narrative using primarily the economic literature on deregulation during a crisis. The temporary deregulation has significantly increased access to treatment and medications and allows for the discovering of a different equilibrium. We also suggest other deregulations that need to be considered. In this paper, we suggest that the provisional deregulations should be made permanent to improve the outcome of the patients who abuse opioids.

2018 ◽  
Vol 169 (9) ◽  
pp. 652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Hawk ◽  
Gail D'Onofrio

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S40-S40
Author(s):  
Joella W Adams ◽  
Alexandra Savinkina ◽  
Mam Jarra Gai ◽  
Allison Hill ◽  
James Hudspeth ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Drug use-associated infective endocarditis (DUA-IE) is typically treated with 4-6 weeks of in hospital intravenous antibiotics (IVA). Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) and partial oral antibiotics (PO) may be as effective as IVA, though long-term outcomes and costs remain unknown. We evaluated the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of four antibiotic treatment strategies for DUA-IE. Methods We used a validated microsimulation model to compare: 1) 4-6 weeks of inpatient IVA along with opioid detoxification, status quo (SQ); 2) 4-6 weeks of inpatient IVA along with inpatient addiction care services (ACS) which offers medications for opioid use disorder (SQ with ACS); 3) 3 weeks of inpatient IVA with ACS followed by OPAT (OPAT); and 4) 3 weeks of IVA with ACS followed by PO antibiotics (PO). We derived model inputs from clinical trials and observational cohorts. All patients were eligible for either in-home or post-acute care OPAT. Outcomes included life years (LYs), discounted costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), proportion of DUA-IE cured, and mortality attributable to DUA-IE. Costs (&US) were annually discounted at 3%. We performed probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) to address uncertainty. Results The SQ scenario resulted in 18.64 LY at a cost of &416,800/person with 77.4% hospitalized DUA-IE patients cured and 5% of deaths in the population were attributable to DUA-IE. Life expectancy was extended by each strategy: 0.017y in SQ with ACS, 0.011 in OPAT, and 0.024 in PO. The PO strategy provided the highest cure rate (80.2%), compared to 77.9% in SQ with ACS and 78.5% in OPAT and X in SQ. OPAT was the least expensive strategy at &412,300/person, Compared to OPAT, PO had an ICER of &141,500/LY. Both SQ strategies provided worse clinical outcomes for money invested than either OPAT or PO (dominated). All scenarios decreased deaths attributable to DUA-IE compared to SQ. Findings were robust in PSA. Table 1 Selected cost and clinical outcomes comparing treatment strategies for drug-use associated infective endocarditis including the status quo, status quo with addiction care services, outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy, and partial oral antibiotics. Conclusion Treating DUA-IE with OPAT along with ACS increases the number of people completing treatment, decreases DUA-IE mortality, and is cost-saving compared to the status quo. The PO strategy also improves clinical outcomes, but may not be cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay threshold of &100,000. Disclosures Simeon D. Kimmel, MD, MA, Abt Associates for a Massachusetts Department of Public Health project to improve access to medications for opioid use disorder in nursing facilities (Consultant)


Author(s):  
Taylor Kirby ◽  
Robert Connell ◽  
Travis Linneman

Abstract Purpose The impact of a focused inpatient educational intervention on rates of medication-assisted therapy (MAT) for veterans with opioid use disorder (OUD) was evaluated. Methods A retrospective cohort analysis compared rates of MAT, along with rates of OUD-related emergency department (ED) visits and/or hospital admission within 1 year, between veterans with a diagnosis of OUD who completed inpatient rehabilitation prior to implementation of a series of group sessions designed to engage intrinsic motivation to change behavior surrounding opioid abuse and provide education about MAT (the control group) and those who completed rehabilitation after implementation of the education program (the intervention group). A post hoc, multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate possible predictors of MAT use and ED and/or hospital readmission, including completion of the opioid series, gender, age (>45 years), race, and specific prior substance(s) of abuse. Results One hundred fifty-eight patients were included: 95 in the control group and 63 in the intervention group. Rates of MAT were 25% (24 of 95 veterans) and 75% (47 of 63 veterans) in control and intervention groups, respectively (P < 0.01). Gender, completion of the opioid series, prior heroin use, and marijuana use met prespecified significance criteria for inclusion in multivariate regression modeling of association with MAT utilization, with participation in the opioid series (odds ratio [OR], 9.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.36-20.96) and prior heroin use (OR, 3.26; 95% CI, 1.18-9.01) found to be significant predictors of MAT utilization on multivariate analysis. Opioid series participation and MAT use were independently associated with decreased rates of OUD-related ED visits and/or hospital admission (hazard ratios of 0.16 [95% CI, 0.06-0.44] and 0.32 [95% CI, 0.14-0.77], respectively) within 1 year after rehabilitation completion. Conclusion Focused OUD-related education in a substance abuse program for veterans with OUD increased rates of MAT and was associated with a decrease in OUD-related ED visits and/or hospital admission within 1 year.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ethan Cowan ◽  
Maria R. Khan ◽  
Siri Shastry ◽  
E. Jennifer Edelman

AbstractThe COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unparalleled societal disruption with wide ranging effects on individual liberties, the economy, and physical and mental health. While no social strata or population has been spared, the pandemic has posed unique and poorly characterized challenges for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). Given the pandemic’s broad effects, it is helpful to organize the risks posed to specific populations using theoretical models. These models can guide scientific inquiry, interventions, and public policy. Models also provide a visual image of the interplay of individual-, network-, community-, structural-, and pandemic-level factors that can lead to increased risks of infection and associated morbidity and mortality for individuals and populations. Such models are not unidirectional, in that actions of individuals, networks, communities and structural changes can also affect overall disease incidence and prevalence. In this commentary, we describe how the social ecological model (SEM) may be applied to describe the theoretical effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). This model can provide a necessary framework to systematically guide time-sensitive research and implementation of individual-, community-, and policy-level interventions to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals with OUD.


Author(s):  
R. Ross MacLean ◽  
Suzanne Spinola ◽  
Gabriella Garcia-Vassallo ◽  
Mehmet Sofuoglu

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 346-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Dupouy ◽  
Sandy Maumus-Robert ◽  
Yohann Mansiaux ◽  
Antoine Pariente ◽  
Maryse Lapeyre-Mestre

<b><i>Background:</i></b> In France, most patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) have been treated by buprenorphine, prescribed by general practitioners (GP) in private practice since 1996. This has contributed to building a ‘French model’ facilitating access to treatment based on the involvement of GPs in buprenorphine prescription. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> Our study aimed to assess whether the involvement of primary care in OUD management has changed lately. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> Using data from the French National Health Insurance database, we conducted a yearly repeated cross-sectional study (2009–2015) and described proportion of opioid maintenance treatment (OMT)-prescribing GPs and OMT-dispensing community pharmacies (CP); and number of patients by GP or CP. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Whereas the number of buprenorphine-prescribing GPs in private practice remained quite stable (decrease of 3%), a substantial decrease in buprenorphine initial prescribers among private GPs was observed. In 2009, 10.3% of private GPs (6,297 from 61,301 French private GPs) prescribed buprenorphine for the initiation of a treatment, whereas they were 5.7% (<i>n</i> = 3,539 from 62,071 private GPs) in 2015 (43.8% decrease). GPs issuing initial prescriptions of buprenorphine tended to care for a higher number of patients treated by buprenorphine (14.6 ± 27.1 patients in 2009 to 16.0 ± 35.4 patients in 2015). The number of CPs dispensing buprenorphine remained quite stable (decrease of 2%), while there was a 7.5% decrease in the total number of French CPs across the study period. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Our results suggest that primary care providers seem less engaged in buprenorphine initiation in OUD patients, while CPs have not modified their involvement towards these patients.


Author(s):  
Isabelle Torrance

Abstract Tom Paulin’s Greek tragedies present extremes of bodily abjection in order to service of a politics of resistance that is tied, in each case, to the political context of the drama’s production. The Riot Act (1984), Seize the Fire (1989), and Medea (2010), share a focus on the degradation of oppressed political groups and feature characters who destabilize the status quo. Yet the impact of disruptive political actions is not ultimately made clear. We are left wondering at the conclusion of each tragedy if the momentous acts of defiance we have witnessed have any power to create systemic change within politically rigged systems. The two 1980s plays are discussed together and form a sequence, with The Riot Act overtly addressing the Northern Irish conflict and Seize the Fire encompassing a broader sweep of oppressive regimes. The politics of discrimination in Medea are illuminated by comparison with similar themes in Paulin’s Love’s Bonfire (2010). Unlike other Northern Irish adaptations of Greek tragedy, Paulin’s dramas, arrested in their political moments, present little hope for the immediate future. Yet in asking us to consider if individual sacrifice is enough to achieve radical change they maintain an open channel for political discourse.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document