影响不足:在 COVID 期间,亚利桑那州对美沙酮和丁丙诺啡使用的联邦监管变化实施有限

Beth E. Meyerson PhD , Keith G. Bentele PhD , Benjamin R. Brady DrPh , Nick Stavros MBA , Danielle M. Russell PhD , Arlene N. Mahoney BSW , Irene Garnett MLIS , Shomari Jackson , Roberto C. Garcia BA , Haley B. Coles MPH , Brenda Granillo DrPh , Gregory A. Carter PhD
{"title":"影响不足:在 COVID 期间,亚利桑那州对美沙酮和丁丙诺啡使用的联邦监管变化实施有限","authors":"Beth E. Meyerson PhD ,&nbsp;Keith G. Bentele PhD ,&nbsp;Benjamin R. Brady DrPh ,&nbsp;Nick Stavros MBA ,&nbsp;Danielle M. Russell PhD ,&nbsp;Arlene N. Mahoney BSW ,&nbsp;Irene Garnett MLIS ,&nbsp;Shomari Jackson ,&nbsp;Roberto C. Garcia BA ,&nbsp;Haley B. Coles MPH ,&nbsp;Brenda Granillo DrPh ,&nbsp;Gregory A. Carter PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.focus.2023.100177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>This study examined the impact of federal regulatory changes on methadone and buprenorphine treatment during COVID-19 in Arizona.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cohort study of methadone and buprenorphine providers from September 14, 2021 to April 15, 2022 measured the proportion of 6 treatment accommodations implemented at 3 time periods: before COVID-19, during Arizona's COVID-19 shutdown, and at the time of the survey completion. Accommodations included (1) telehealth, (2) telehealth buprenorphine induction, (3) increased multiday dosing, (4) license reciprocity, (5) home medications delivery, and (6) off-site dispensing. A multilevel model assessed the association of treatment setting, rurality, and treatment with accommodation implementation time.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Over half (62.2%) of the 74-provider sample practiced in healthcare settings not primarily focused on addiction treatment, 19% practiced in methadone clinics, and 19% practiced in treatment clinics not offering methadone. Almost half (43%) were unaware of the regulatory changes allowing treatment accommodation. Telehealth was most frequently reported, increasing from 30% before COVID-19 to 80% at the time of the survey. Multiday dosing was the only accommodation substantially retracted after COVID-19 shutdown: from 41% to 23% at the time of the survey. Providers with higher patient limits were 2.5–3.2 times as likely to implement telehealth services, 4.4 times as likely to implement buprenorphine induction through telehealth, and 15.2–20.9 times as likely to implement license reciprocity as providers with lower patient limits. Providers of methadone implemented 12% more accommodations and maintained a higher average proportion of implemented accommodations during the COVID-19 shutdown period but were more likely to reduce the proportion of implemented accommodations (a 17-percentage point gap by the time of the survey).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Federal regulatory changes are not sufficient to produce a substantive or sustained impact on provider accommodations, especially in methadone medical treatment settings. Practice change interventions specific to treatment settings should be implemented and studied for their impact.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72142,"journal":{"name":"AJPM focus","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773065423001141/pdfft?md5=195d1c5472cff33fd51d0825fefa446d&pid=1-s2.0-S2773065423001141-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Insufficient Impact: Limited Implementation of Federal Regulatory Changes to Methadone and Buprenorphine Access in Arizona During COVID-19\",\"authors\":\"Beth E. Meyerson PhD ,&nbsp;Keith G. Bentele PhD ,&nbsp;Benjamin R. Brady DrPh ,&nbsp;Nick Stavros MBA ,&nbsp;Danielle M. Russell PhD ,&nbsp;Arlene N. Mahoney BSW ,&nbsp;Irene Garnett MLIS ,&nbsp;Shomari Jackson ,&nbsp;Roberto C. Garcia BA ,&nbsp;Haley B. Coles MPH ,&nbsp;Brenda Granillo DrPh ,&nbsp;Gregory A. Carter PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.focus.2023.100177\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>This study examined the impact of federal regulatory changes on methadone and buprenorphine treatment during COVID-19 in Arizona.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cohort study of methadone and buprenorphine providers from September 14, 2021 to April 15, 2022 measured the proportion of 6 treatment accommodations implemented at 3 time periods: before COVID-19, during Arizona's COVID-19 shutdown, and at the time of the survey completion. Accommodations included (1) telehealth, (2) telehealth buprenorphine induction, (3) increased multiday dosing, (4) license reciprocity, (5) home medications delivery, and (6) off-site dispensing. A multilevel model assessed the association of treatment setting, rurality, and treatment with accommodation implementation time.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Over half (62.2%) of the 74-provider sample practiced in healthcare settings not primarily focused on addiction treatment, 19% practiced in methadone clinics, and 19% practiced in treatment clinics not offering methadone. Almost half (43%) were unaware of the regulatory changes allowing treatment accommodation. Telehealth was most frequently reported, increasing from 30% before COVID-19 to 80% at the time of the survey. Multiday dosing was the only accommodation substantially retracted after COVID-19 shutdown: from 41% to 23% at the time of the survey. Providers with higher patient limits were 2.5–3.2 times as likely to implement telehealth services, 4.4 times as likely to implement buprenorphine induction through telehealth, and 15.2–20.9 times as likely to implement license reciprocity as providers with lower patient limits. Providers of methadone implemented 12% more accommodations and maintained a higher average proportion of implemented accommodations during the COVID-19 shutdown period but were more likely to reduce the proportion of implemented accommodations (a 17-percentage point gap by the time of the survey).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Federal regulatory changes are not sufficient to produce a substantive or sustained impact on provider accommodations, especially in methadone medical treatment settings. Practice change interventions specific to treatment settings should be implemented and studied for their impact.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72142,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJPM focus\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773065423001141/pdfft?md5=195d1c5472cff33fd51d0825fefa446d&pid=1-s2.0-S2773065423001141-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJPM focus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773065423001141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJPM focus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773065423001141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

方法对 2021 年 9 月 14 日至 2022 年 4 月 15 日期间的美沙酮和丁丙诺啡提供者进行队列研究,测量在 COVID-19 之前、亚利桑那州 COVID-19 期间和调查完成时这 3 个时间段实施的 6 种治疗调整的比例。适应措施包括:(1)远程医疗;(2)远程医疗丁丙诺啡诱导;(3)增加多日剂量;(4)许可证互惠;(5)上门送药;(6)异地配药。一个多层次模型评估了治疗环境、乡村和治疗与住宿实施时间之间的关联。结果在 74 个提供者样本中,有一半以上(62.2%)在不以戒毒治疗为主要重点的医疗机构中从业,19%在美沙酮诊所中从业,19%在不提供美沙酮的治疗诊所中从业。近一半(43%)的医疗服务提供者不知道允许治疗通融的法规变化。报告最多的是远程医疗,从 COVID-19 之前的 30% 增加到调查时的 80%。多日给药是 COVID-19 关闭后唯一大幅缩减的通融措施:从 41% 降至调查时的 23%。病人限额较高的医疗机构实施远程医疗服务的可能性是病人限额较低的医疗机构的 2.5-3.2 倍,通过远程医疗实施丁丙诺啡诱导的可能性是病人限额较低的医疗机构的 4.4 倍,实施许可证互惠的可能性是病人限额较低的医疗机构的 15.2-20.9 倍。在 COVID-19 停业期间,美沙酮医疗机构实施的便利措施比其他医疗机构多 12%,实施便利措施的平均比例也更高,但更有可能降低实施便利措施的比例(调查期间的差距为 17 个百分点)。应实施针对治疗场所的实践变革干预措施,并研究其影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Insufficient Impact: Limited Implementation of Federal Regulatory Changes to Methadone and Buprenorphine Access in Arizona During COVID-19

Introduction

This study examined the impact of federal regulatory changes on methadone and buprenorphine treatment during COVID-19 in Arizona.

Methods

A cohort study of methadone and buprenorphine providers from September 14, 2021 to April 15, 2022 measured the proportion of 6 treatment accommodations implemented at 3 time periods: before COVID-19, during Arizona's COVID-19 shutdown, and at the time of the survey completion. Accommodations included (1) telehealth, (2) telehealth buprenorphine induction, (3) increased multiday dosing, (4) license reciprocity, (5) home medications delivery, and (6) off-site dispensing. A multilevel model assessed the association of treatment setting, rurality, and treatment with accommodation implementation time.

Results

Over half (62.2%) of the 74-provider sample practiced in healthcare settings not primarily focused on addiction treatment, 19% practiced in methadone clinics, and 19% practiced in treatment clinics not offering methadone. Almost half (43%) were unaware of the regulatory changes allowing treatment accommodation. Telehealth was most frequently reported, increasing from 30% before COVID-19 to 80% at the time of the survey. Multiday dosing was the only accommodation substantially retracted after COVID-19 shutdown: from 41% to 23% at the time of the survey. Providers with higher patient limits were 2.5–3.2 times as likely to implement telehealth services, 4.4 times as likely to implement buprenorphine induction through telehealth, and 15.2–20.9 times as likely to implement license reciprocity as providers with lower patient limits. Providers of methadone implemented 12% more accommodations and maintained a higher average proportion of implemented accommodations during the COVID-19 shutdown period but were more likely to reduce the proportion of implemented accommodations (a 17-percentage point gap by the time of the survey).

Conclusions

Federal regulatory changes are not sufficient to produce a substantive or sustained impact on provider accommodations, especially in methadone medical treatment settings. Practice change interventions specific to treatment settings should be implemented and studied for their impact.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AJPM focus
AJPM focus Health, Public Health and Health Policy
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board and Journal Information Work-Related Factors Associated With Psychological Distress Among Grocery Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic Lifestyle Differences in the Metabolic Comorbidity Score of Adult Population From South Asian Countries: A Cross-Sectional Study Corrigendum: Associations of Historical Redlining With BMI and Waist Circumference in Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults Physicians’ Self-Reported Knowledge and Behaviors Related to Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain and Diagnosing Opioid Use Disorder, DocStyles, 2020
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1