Jennifer J. Carroll , Nabarun Dasgupta , Bayla Ostrach , Taleed El-Sabawi , Sarah Dixon , Brandon Morrissey , Roxanne Saucier
{"title":"在北卡罗来纳州,以证据为基础的阿片类药物使用障碍治疗普遍缺乏,住院药物使用服务提供者通常也不鼓励这种治疗。","authors":"Jennifer J. Carroll , Nabarun Dasgupta , Bayla Ostrach , Taleed El-Sabawi , Sarah Dixon , Brandon Morrissey , Roxanne Saucier","doi":"10.1016/j.josat.2024.209474","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is the only treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) proven to reduce overdose mortality, yet access to this evidence-based treatment remains poor. The purpose of this cross-sectional audit study was to assess OAT availability at residential substance use services in North Carolina.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a state-wide inventory of residential substance use service providers in North Carolina and subsequently called all providers identified, posing as uninsured persons who use heroin, seeking treatment services. Program characteristics, as reported in phone calls, were systematically recorded. We used Fisher's exact tests to assess what program characteristics were associated with OAT availability and with staff making discouraging comments about OAT. We used unsupervised agglomerative clustering to identify facilities with similar characteristics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of the 94 treatment providers identified, we successfully contacted and collected data from 66. Of those, only 7 (10.6 %) provide OAT on site; an additional 9 (13.6 %) allow OAT through an outside or community-based prescriber. Only 8 (12.1 %) providers were licensed to provide residential substance use treatment. Staff from 33 (50.0 %) providers made negative, discouraging, or stigmatizing remarks about OAT—for example, that OAT substitutes one addiction for another or does not constitute “true recovery.” OAT availability was positively associated with a provider holding a state license for any substance use-related service (41.9 % vs 8.6 %, <em>p</em> = 0.002) and offering 12-step programming (36.1 % vs. 10/0 %, <em>p</em> = 0.020). OAT availability was negatively associated with faith-based programming (6.1 % vs 42.4 %, <em>p</em> = 0.001), dress codes (5.3 % vs 50.0 %, <em>p</em> < 0.001), and mandates that residents work in a provider-owned and -operated commercial enterprise (5.0 % vs 32.6 %, <em>p</em> = 0.026). Cluster analysis revealed that the most common (<em>n</em> = 21) type of service provider in North Carolina is an unlicensed, faith-based organization that prohibits OAT, imposes a dress code, and mandates that residents work, often in provider-owned and -operated commercial enterprises.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Evidence-based treatments for OUD are largely unavailable at providers of residential substance use services in North Carolina. The prohibition of OAT occurs most often among providers who are unlicensed and impose labor and/or 12-step mandates on residents. Changes to state licensure requirements and exemptions may help improve OAT availability.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73960,"journal":{"name":"Journal of substance use and addiction treatment","volume":"167 ","pages":"Article 209474"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949875924001863/pdfft?md5=3e0a80349e3d0a3c7d590b7f366b8d7e&pid=1-s2.0-S2949875924001863-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder is widely unavailable and often discouraged by providers of residential substance use services in North Carolina\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer J. Carroll , Nabarun Dasgupta , Bayla Ostrach , Taleed El-Sabawi , Sarah Dixon , Brandon Morrissey , Roxanne Saucier\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.josat.2024.209474\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is the only treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) proven to reduce overdose mortality, yet access to this evidence-based treatment remains poor. The purpose of this cross-sectional audit study was to assess OAT availability at residential substance use services in North Carolina.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a state-wide inventory of residential substance use service providers in North Carolina and subsequently called all providers identified, posing as uninsured persons who use heroin, seeking treatment services. Program characteristics, as reported in phone calls, were systematically recorded. We used Fisher's exact tests to assess what program characteristics were associated with OAT availability and with staff making discouraging comments about OAT. We used unsupervised agglomerative clustering to identify facilities with similar characteristics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of the 94 treatment providers identified, we successfully contacted and collected data from 66. Of those, only 7 (10.6 %) provide OAT on site; an additional 9 (13.6 %) allow OAT through an outside or community-based prescriber. Only 8 (12.1 %) providers were licensed to provide residential substance use treatment. Staff from 33 (50.0 %) providers made negative, discouraging, or stigmatizing remarks about OAT—for example, that OAT substitutes one addiction for another or does not constitute “true recovery.” OAT availability was positively associated with a provider holding a state license for any substance use-related service (41.9 % vs 8.6 %, <em>p</em> = 0.002) and offering 12-step programming (36.1 % vs. 10/0 %, <em>p</em> = 0.020). OAT availability was negatively associated with faith-based programming (6.1 % vs 42.4 %, <em>p</em> = 0.001), dress codes (5.3 % vs 50.0 %, <em>p</em> < 0.001), and mandates that residents work in a provider-owned and -operated commercial enterprise (5.0 % vs 32.6 %, <em>p</em> = 0.026). Cluster analysis revealed that the most common (<em>n</em> = 21) type of service provider in North Carolina is an unlicensed, faith-based organization that prohibits OAT, imposes a dress code, and mandates that residents work, often in provider-owned and -operated commercial enterprises.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Evidence-based treatments for OUD are largely unavailable at providers of residential substance use services in North Carolina. The prohibition of OAT occurs most often among providers who are unlicensed and impose labor and/or 12-step mandates on residents. Changes to state licensure requirements and exemptions may help improve OAT availability.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73960,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of substance use and addiction treatment\",\"volume\":\"167 \",\"pages\":\"Article 209474\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949875924001863/pdfft?md5=3e0a80349e3d0a3c7d590b7f366b8d7e&pid=1-s2.0-S2949875924001863-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of substance use and addiction treatment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949875924001863\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of substance use and addiction treatment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949875924001863","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder is widely unavailable and often discouraged by providers of residential substance use services in North Carolina
Introduction
Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is the only treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) proven to reduce overdose mortality, yet access to this evidence-based treatment remains poor. The purpose of this cross-sectional audit study was to assess OAT availability at residential substance use services in North Carolina.
Methods
We conducted a state-wide inventory of residential substance use service providers in North Carolina and subsequently called all providers identified, posing as uninsured persons who use heroin, seeking treatment services. Program characteristics, as reported in phone calls, were systematically recorded. We used Fisher's exact tests to assess what program characteristics were associated with OAT availability and with staff making discouraging comments about OAT. We used unsupervised agglomerative clustering to identify facilities with similar characteristics.
Results
Of the 94 treatment providers identified, we successfully contacted and collected data from 66. Of those, only 7 (10.6 %) provide OAT on site; an additional 9 (13.6 %) allow OAT through an outside or community-based prescriber. Only 8 (12.1 %) providers were licensed to provide residential substance use treatment. Staff from 33 (50.0 %) providers made negative, discouraging, or stigmatizing remarks about OAT—for example, that OAT substitutes one addiction for another or does not constitute “true recovery.” OAT availability was positively associated with a provider holding a state license for any substance use-related service (41.9 % vs 8.6 %, p = 0.002) and offering 12-step programming (36.1 % vs. 10/0 %, p = 0.020). OAT availability was negatively associated with faith-based programming (6.1 % vs 42.4 %, p = 0.001), dress codes (5.3 % vs 50.0 %, p < 0.001), and mandates that residents work in a provider-owned and -operated commercial enterprise (5.0 % vs 32.6 %, p = 0.026). Cluster analysis revealed that the most common (n = 21) type of service provider in North Carolina is an unlicensed, faith-based organization that prohibits OAT, imposes a dress code, and mandates that residents work, often in provider-owned and -operated commercial enterprises.
Conclusion
Evidence-based treatments for OUD are largely unavailable at providers of residential substance use services in North Carolina. The prohibition of OAT occurs most often among providers who are unlicensed and impose labor and/or 12-step mandates on residents. Changes to state licensure requirements and exemptions may help improve OAT availability.