许可政策可帮助各州确保在专业戒毒治疗中获得阿片类药物使用障碍药物。

IF 8.6 1区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Affairs Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01306
Alene Kennedy-Hendricks, Minna Song, Alexander D McCourt, Joshua M Sharfstein, Matthew D Eisenberg, Brendan Saloner
{"title":"许可政策可帮助各州确保在专业戒毒治疗中获得阿片类药物使用障碍药物。","authors":"Alene Kennedy-Hendricks, Minna Song, Alexander D McCourt, Joshua M Sharfstein, Matthew D Eisenberg, Brendan Saloner","doi":"10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite the devastating toll of the overdose crisis in the United States, many addiction treatment programs do not offer medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Several states have incorporated MOUD requirements into their standards for treatment program licensure. This study examined policy officials' and treatment providers' perspectives on the implementation of these policies. During 2020-22, we conducted thirty-one semistructured interviews with forty policy officials and treatment providers in nine states identified through a legal analysis. Of these states, three states required treatment organizations to offer MOUD, and two prohibited organizations from denying admission to people receiving MOUD. Qualitative findings revealed that licensure policies were part of a broader effort to transition the specialty treatment system to a model of care more consistent with medical evidence; states perceived tension between raising quality standards and maintaining adequate treatment capacity; aligning other state policies with MOUD access goals facilitated implementation of the licensure requirement; and measuring compliance was challenging. Licensure may offer states an opportunity to take a more active role in ensuring access to effective treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":50411,"journal":{"name":"Health Affairs","volume":"43 5","pages":"732-739"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Licensure Policies May Help States Ensure Access To Opioid Use Disorder Medication In Specialty Addiction Treatment.\",\"authors\":\"Alene Kennedy-Hendricks, Minna Song, Alexander D McCourt, Joshua M Sharfstein, Matthew D Eisenberg, Brendan Saloner\",\"doi\":\"10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01306\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Despite the devastating toll of the overdose crisis in the United States, many addiction treatment programs do not offer medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Several states have incorporated MOUD requirements into their standards for treatment program licensure. This study examined policy officials' and treatment providers' perspectives on the implementation of these policies. During 2020-22, we conducted thirty-one semistructured interviews with forty policy officials and treatment providers in nine states identified through a legal analysis. Of these states, three states required treatment organizations to offer MOUD, and two prohibited organizations from denying admission to people receiving MOUD. Qualitative findings revealed that licensure policies were part of a broader effort to transition the specialty treatment system to a model of care more consistent with medical evidence; states perceived tension between raising quality standards and maintaining adequate treatment capacity; aligning other state policies with MOUD access goals facilitated implementation of the licensure requirement; and measuring compliance was challenging. Licensure may offer states an opportunity to take a more active role in ensuring access to effective treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Affairs\",\"volume\":\"43 5\",\"pages\":\"732-739\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01306\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01306","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管过量用药危机在美国造成了巨大的破坏,但许多戒毒计划并不提供治疗阿片类药物使用障碍 (MOUD) 的药物。一些州已将 MOUD 要求纳入其治疗项目许可标准。本研究考察了政策官员和治疗机构对这些政策实施情况的看法。2020-22 年期间,我们对通过法律分析确定的九个州的四十名政策官员和治疗机构进行了三十一次半结构式访谈。在这些州中,有三个州要求治疗机构提供 "谅解备忘录",有两个州禁止治疗机构拒绝接受 "谅解备忘录 "的患者。定性研究结果显示,许可政策是专科治疗系统向更符合医学证据的治疗模式转型的更广泛努力的一部分;各州认为在提高质量标准和保持足够的治疗能力之间存在矛盾;将其他州的政策与获得 MOUD 的目标结合起来有利于实施许可要求;衡量合规性具有挑战性。许可证制度为各州提供了一个机会,在确保获得有效治疗方面发挥更积极的作用。
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
Licensure Policies May Help States Ensure Access To Opioid Use Disorder Medication In Specialty Addiction Treatment.

Despite the devastating toll of the overdose crisis in the United States, many addiction treatment programs do not offer medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Several states have incorporated MOUD requirements into their standards for treatment program licensure. This study examined policy officials' and treatment providers' perspectives on the implementation of these policies. During 2020-22, we conducted thirty-one semistructured interviews with forty policy officials and treatment providers in nine states identified through a legal analysis. Of these states, three states required treatment organizations to offer MOUD, and two prohibited organizations from denying admission to people receiving MOUD. Qualitative findings revealed that licensure policies were part of a broader effort to transition the specialty treatment system to a model of care more consistent with medical evidence; states perceived tension between raising quality standards and maintaining adequate treatment capacity; aligning other state policies with MOUD access goals facilitated implementation of the licensure requirement; and measuring compliance was challenging. Licensure may offer states an opportunity to take a more active role in ensuring access to effective treatment.

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
Health Affairs
Health Affairs 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
15.00
自引率
2.10%
发文量
246
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Affairs is a prestigious journal that aims to thoroughly examine significant health policy matters both domestically and globally. Our publication is committed to addressing issues that are relevant to both the private and public sectors. We are enthusiastic about inviting private and public decision-makers to contribute their innovative ideas in a publishable format. Health Affairs seeks to incorporate various perspectives from industry, labor, government, and academia, ensuring that our readers benefit from the diverse viewpoints within the healthcare field.
期刊最新文献
Judicial Decisions Constraining Public Health Powers During COVID-19: Implications For Public Health Policy Making. Engaging Antiracist And Decolonial Praxis To Advance Equity In Oregon Public Health Surveillance Practices. Colocating Syringe Services, COVID-19 Vaccination, And Infectious Disease Testing: Baltimore's Experience. Coming Up Short: How Cancer Drug Shortages Affect Care. Community Health Workers Can Bridge The Gap.
×
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