New AATOD Policy Statement: Increasing Access to Medication to Treat Opioid Addiction

AATODEarlier this month AATOD issued a policy paper “Increasing Access to Medication to Treat Opioid Addiction – Increasing Access for the Treatment of Opioid Addiction with Medications.” AATOD noted that “this paper raises a number of questions in order to stimulate a thoughtful policy discussion given the urgency of the public health crisis of untreated opioid addiction”.

The statement provides a discussion of: the value of providing comprehensive treatment services to treat a complicated illness, current policy debates on OTPs, DATA 2000 practices, reports of medication diversion, and future policy considerations

http://www.aatod.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/MAT-Policy-Paper-FINAL-070214-2.pdf

Source: The American Association of the Treatment of Opioid Dependence – July 2, 2014

 

Treat Patients with Addiction During, After Hospitalization, Researchers Say

hospital sign purchasedshutterstock_33280960The results of a new study demonstrate that starting hospitalized patients who have an opioid (heroin) addiction on buprenorphine treatment in the hospital and seamlessly connecting them with an outpatient office based treatment program can greatly reduce whether they relapse after they are discharged.

Led by researchers at Boston Medical Center (BMC), the study shows the important role that providers play in offering these patients addiction treatment both while in the hospital and after – even if their primary reason for being in the hospital is not for their addiction.

In this study, 139 hospitalized individuals with opioid addiction who were not already in treatment were randomized into two groups. One group received a tapered dose treatment of buprenorphine for withdrawal and referral information about community treatment programs and the other were initiated on buprenorphine, an opioid substitute proven to treat opioid addiction, along with referral to a primary care office-based buprenorphine treatment program.

Of those in the buprenorphine maintenance group, more than one third (37 percent) reported no illicit opioid/drug use for the month after they left the hospital compared to less than one in ten (nine percent) among the control group. These patients also reported, on average, fewer days of illicit drug use and continued to use less over the following six months. This effect was evident despite the fact that these patients did not initially come to the hospital seeking treatment for their addiction.

“Unfortunately, referral to substance abuse treatment after discharge is often a secondary concern of physicians caring for hospitalized patients,” said Jane Liebschutz, MD, MPH, a physician in general internal medicine at BMC and associate professor of medicine at Boston University School of Medicine, who served as the study’s corresponding author. “However, our results show that we can have a marked impact on patient’s addiction by addressing it during their hospitalization.”

This study is published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2014-06-patients-addiction-hospitalization.html

Source: Boston Medical University –  June 30, 2014

Online Training Module From PCSS MAT – American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP) – Utilizing Innovative Strategies and Community Resources for Methadone Treatment

webThis module is free of charge and provides techniques and strategies that clinicians and program administrators can use to enhance methadone and buprenorphine maintenance treatment.  This affirmative approach aims to improve the experience of both the patients and the staff by encouraging positive interactions between staff and patients and among the patients in an effort to develop a recovery community.  Methadone patients often feel isolated and have limited opportunities for sober social support.  This presentation directly addresses some of the limitations of the modality and provides ideas and options to clinicians to combat the stigma long associated with maintenance treatment by integrating peer services into treatment.

The presenter is Sarah H. Church, PhD, Executive Director, Division of Substance Abuse Albert Einstein College of Medicine.

http://pcssmat.org/event/aaap-online-module-posted-utilizing-innovative-strategies-and-community-resources-for-methadone-treatment/

A listing of upcoming PCSS-MAT webinars is available at: http://pcssmat.org/education-training/webinars/

Source: PCSS – MAT Training – July 1, 2014

Feds Seek Ways to Expand Use of Addiction Drug

White House“The government’s top drug abuse experts are struggling to find ways to expand use of a medicine that is considered the best therapy for treating heroin and painkiller addiction.

Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan on Wednesday pressed officials from the White House, the National Institute of Drug Abuse and other agencies to increase access to buprenorphine, a medication which helps control drug cravings and withdrawal symptoms. It remains underused a decade after its launch.

“As long as we have too few doctors certified to prescribe bupe, we will be missing a major weapon in the fight against the ravages of addiction,” Levin told the forum, which also included patients and non-government medical experts.”

http://bostonherald.com/business/business_markets/2014/06/feds_seek_ways_to_expand_use_of_addiction_drug

Source: BostonHerald.com – June 18, 2014

Drugs for Treating Heroin Users: A New Abuse Problem in the Making?

“Evidence is mounting that certain drugs used to treat heroin users are themselves being sold on the streets – and may even be a ‘gateway’ to heroin or opioid use. As some experts herald their value for treating addiction, others ask if the ‘cure’ is making things worse.

More than a decade ago, the FDA partnered with a British company to develop Suboxone, a new treatment for addiction to opioids. But that effort has had highs and lows, experts say. Lifesaving to some opioid abusers, Suboxone and generic drugs like it have not helped others to whom they have been prescribed – in part, these experts say, because of poor oversight of how the opioids are dispensed and used.

Those drugs have also ended up where the U.S .government hoped they wouldn’t: on the street, where they are sold in the same illicit subculture in which heroin and prescription painkillers are peddled.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2014/0530/Drugs-for-treating-heroin-users-a-new-abuse-problem-in-the-making

Source: Christian Science Monitor – May 30, 2014

Providing Buprenorphine in an Opioid Treatment Program: Challenges and Opportunities

shutterstock_3917107When the federal government said in December of 2012 that opioid treatment programs (OTPs) can dispense take-home doses of buprenorphine with fewer restrictions than are placed on take-home doses for methadone—in particular, no waiting period (http://atforum.com/news/2013/02/otps-can-now-dispense-buprenorphine-take-homes-with-no-waiting-periods/), there was an expectation that patients and treatment providers would be interested in buprenorphine. But there was also a concern that the high cost of buprenorphine compared to methadone would be an obstacle. In addition, states have their own rules that may be stricter than the federal government’s.

It turns out that more than a year later, most OTPs are still not dispensing buprenorphine on a widespread basis, and the main reasons are cost and insurance reimbursement. “I just completed a survey among the State Opioid Treatment Authorities, to find out what they think the impediments are to the use of buprenorphine in their state,” Mark Parrino, MPA, President of the American Association for the Treatment of Opioid Dependence (AATOD), told AT Forum in April. “It would seem that the biggest singular impediment is the lack of insurance reimbursement in OTPs.

“California and New York are states with the largest number of certified OTPs; however, California Medicaid does not provide any reimbursement for buprenorphine use in OTPs. At the present time, New York State does not have a current Medicaid reimbursement mechanism for buprenorphine use in their OTPs, although it did have such a reimbursement before the state converted to a new system called APGs [Ambulatory Patient Groups]. I understand that state officials and treatment providers, as organized through COMPA [Committee of Methadone Program Administrators of New York State, Inc.] are working to correct the problem.“

Other states have legislative restrictions for the use of public funds to use buprenorphine in OTPs. Idaho provides a case in point. North Dakota has just released its administrative/licensing regulations for OTPs, and the use of buprenorphine will be required in newly sited OTPs.

Here’s the problem. If buprenorphine is picked up in a pharmacy, the pharmacy benefit covers it. But if it’s dispensed by an OTP, there is no separate reimbursement for the medication—the cost has to come out of the fee the OTP gets for overall treatment. The cost of methadone is far less than the cost of buprenorphine, depending on the formulation.

Private insurance generally doesn’t cover OTP treatment services, in general, so the bulk of the payment falls on Medicaid or on self-pay patients. While there are 49 states that now allow OTPs, only 33 of them allow Medicaid to pay for such treatment, said Mr. Parrino. In the other states, patients have to make out-of-pocket payments. We have also learned that commercial insurance is providing coverage for OTP services but there are a number of restrictions when it comes to paying a claim.

“It’s a state-by-state fight,” he said. “There is no federal fix for this. There are states that have buprenorphine-only OTPs. Ohio provides an illustration where three buprenorphine-only OTPs were approved in 2013. Other states have reported this as well.”

Of course, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) would not block states that wanted to reimburse OTPs for dispensing buprenorphine, but CMS has historically not intervened if a state refuses to do so.

In some states, there are still regulatory, bureaucratic barriers that need to be fixed. For example, in many states, before the reimbursement issue can even be addressed, language changes are needed that would allow buprenorphine to be dispensed in an OTP.

In self-pay states, adding the cost of buprenorphine to what patients are already paying would be prohibitive, said Mr. Parrino. In spite of this, some treatment systems such as CRC have indicated that 10 percent of their patient population is currently utilizing buprenorphine through their network of OTPs.

When the rule allowing buprenorphine dispensing was published, Mr. Parrino immediately suggested to states that they look into actions that would encourage the use of buprenorphine. However, he doesn’t think there is necessarily great interest in patients switching from methadone to buprenorphine. “I haven’t heard of any groundswell of patients in an OTP saying ‘Please put me on buprenorphine so I can qualify for take-homes,’” he said.

There’s a lot that isn’t known, especially about the physicians who are prescribing buprenorphine from their offices. “We don’t know how many physicians are monitoring and tracking their patients,” said Mr. Parrino, noting that such monitoring and tracking is done by OTPs through federal and state regulations. But intuitively, he said, it makes some sense that a patient would rather go to an office-based treatment—regardless of whether the medication were methadone (which isn’t allowed to be dispensed or prescribed from an office), or buprenorphine—than to an OTP. “If I’m a patient who can pay for care, do I want to go to an OTP where there’s counseling requirements and toxicology testing, or to a physician where there aren’t any treatment requirements?” he asked rhetorically. “On the other hand, I have been informed that some patients do want such services and access such care through OTPs. It is also important to keep in mind that a number of physicians who have DATA 2000 practices are providing excellent care to patients as well as providing a comprehensive array of services at or through their offices. We just do not have credible data to indicate who is doing what.”

There are approximately 325,000 patients in OTPs at the present time. While it’s not clear how many patients are in ongoing treatment with buprenorphine from office-based physicians, AATOD estimates the number to be between 400,000 and 500,000.The number is based on prescriptions being written, but not necessarily unique patients, said Mr. Parrino.

In Vermont, where more OTPs are opening up, there is a current perceived advantage of having patients medicated on site, even with buprenorphine, because of diversion related issues.

New Jersey

We talked with Ed Higgins, MA, executive director and CEO of JSAS Healthcare Services, an OTP based in Neptune, New Jersey, and the only non-profit OTP in two contiguous counties. The insurance reimbursement problem is a reality, he said. When buprenorphine first came on the market, as Suboxone and Subutex, OTPs made sure it would be covered by Medicaid. And it is—but only as a pharmacy benefit. “I’m not a pharmacy,” said Mr. Higgins. “A Medicaid Rx card won’t work here.” The retail price for a 1-week supply of only 8 milligrams a day of buprenorphine is $50.

So at JSAS, all three physicians are waivered to prescribe buprenorphine. Two of them are American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) physicians. They see patients and write a prescription for buprenorphine, most of which is not reimbursed, said Mr. Higgins. “We can’t bill extra for the induction,” he added. “It’s just a regular Medicaid office visit, and we’re working on 1985 rates.” Only one of our ASAM physicians is currently accepting self-pay patients.

Patients can get buprenorphine from other waived physicians, of course, but Mr. Higgins describes this as the “Wild West,” where patients are charged as much as $350 to $500 for the induction.

Mr. Higgins agrees that the cost of buprenorphine is prohibitive for self-pay patients. And he is curious about the “hundreds of thousands” of patients who enroll in the private-practice model of buprenorphine treatment each year. “This begs for a follow-up study,” he said. “How many of those patients stay in treatment?” There are also questions about dosing: the limit was supposed to be 16 milligrams a day, but there are some patients who require 24 milligrams—although not in his clinic—said Mr. Higgins. “That’s the reality in the private sector.” Some managed care companies are now mandating that patients on buprenorphine be given at least one counseling session a month, he said, while others have no counseling requirement.

Finally, Mr. Higgins said that there are patients who feel better on methadone. But they can’t have the freedom of going to private practitioners, and also be on methadone.

Fewer than 5 percent of the patients at JSAS are on buprenorphine, said Mr. Higgins. “In the world I’d like to live in, we would look at a patient, especially a younger patient, and say, ‘We have some choices for you.’” The OTP could recommend buprenorphine first, and if it doesn’t work, then easily convert to methadone. The problem is that the prices are still too high. There are now five generic forms of buprenorphine, and Mr. Higgins would like to see the manufacturers get together and lower the prices dramatically. “I’m not talking about 10 percent,” he said.

Now, however, the choices just come down to finance. “I can give you 80 milligrams of methadone, and my lowest cost for that is 36 cents. Or you can get a prescription for    16 milligrams of buprenorphine, which is a therapeutic dose, and your weekly cost is going to be approximately $100.”

JSAS gets $120 per month per patient from Medicaid.

 

 

 

Blog by Jana Burson Methadone and Buprenorphine During Incarceration

jail-cropped“As a health care provider, of course I’m opposed to any refusal to treatment a patient while incarcerated. I think it’s a violation of the 8th Amendment about cruel and unusual punishment, but since I’m no legal scholar, I’ve searched the internet for more information about this situation. I found a great article co-authored by a doctor and a lawyer. They make the point that opioid addiction is a complex illness, and forced withdrawal causes severe physical and psychological suffering. Also, because opioid withdrawal makes people especially vulnerable, they may be coerced into giving testimony that incriminates themselves. They are less able to make decisions.

Prisons are charged to provide as much care as is available to prisoners as general population, yet opioid addicts are denied access to medication-assisted treatments for addiction. These treatments are, as you probably know if you’re a regular reader of this blog, one of the most evidenced-based medical treatments in all of medicine.”

http://janaburson.wordpress.com/2014/05/11/methadone-and-buprenorphine-during-incarceration/

Source: JanaBurson.com – May 11, 2014

News From the States

National Institutes of Health Press Release: HHS Leaders Call For Expanded Use of Medications to Combat Opioid Overdose Epidemic

New England Journal of Medicine commentary describes that vital medications are currently underutilized in addiction treatment services and discusses ongoing efforts by major public health agencies to encourage their use

A national response to the epidemic of prescription opioid overdose deaths was outlined in the New England Journal of Medicine by leaders of agencies in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The commentary calls upon health care providers to expand their use of medications to treat opioid addiction and reduce overdose deaths, and describes a number of misperceptions that have limited access to these potentially life-saving medications. The commentary also discusses how medications can be used in combination with behavior therapies to help drug users recover and remain drug-free, and use of data-driven tracking to monitor program progress.

The commentary was authored by leaders of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) within the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

“When prescribed and monitored properly, medications such as methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone are safe and cost-effective components of opioid addiction treatment,” said lead author and NIDA Director Nora D. Volkow, M.D. “These medications can improve lives and reduce the risk of overdose, yet medication-assisted therapies are markedly underutilized.”

Research has led to several medications that can be used to help treat opioid addiction, including methadone, usually administered in clinics; buprenorphine, which can be given by qualifying doctors; and naltrexone, now available in a once-a-month injectable, long-acting form. The authors stress the value of these medications and describe reasons why treatment services have been slow to utilize them. The reasons include inadequate provider education and misunderstandings about addiction medications by the public, health care providers, insurers, and patients. For example, one common, long-held misperception is that medication-assisted therapies merely replace one addiction for another – an attitude that is not backed by the science. The authors also discuss the importance of naloxone, a potentially life-saving medication that blocks the effects of opioids as a person first shows symptoms of an overdose.

The article describes how HHS agencies are collaborating with public and private stakeholders to expand access to and improve utilization of medication-assisted therapies, in tandem with other targeted approaches to reducing opioid overdoses.  For example, NIDA is funding research to improve access to medication-assisted therapies, develop new medications for opioid addiction, and expand access to naloxone by exploring more user-friendly delivery systems (for example, nasal sprays). CDC is working with states to implement comprehensive strategies for overdose prevention that include medication-assisted therapies, as well as enhanced surveillance of prescriptions and clinical practices. CDC is also establishing statewide norms to provide better tools for the medical community in making prescription decisions.

Charged with providing access to treatment programs, SAMHSA is encouraging medication-assisted therapy through the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant as well as regulatory oversight of medications used to treat opioid addiction. SAMHSA has also developed an Opioid Overdose Toolkit  to educate first responders in the use of naloxone to prevent overdose deaths. The toolkit includes easy-to-understand information about recognizing and responding appropriately to overdose, specific drug-use behaviors to avoid, and the role of naloxone in preventing fatal overdose.

“SAMHSA’s Opioid Overdose Toolkit is the first federal resource to provide safety and prevention information for those at risk for overdose and for their loved ones,” said co-author and SAMHSA Administrator Pamela S. Hyde, J.D. “It also gives local governments the information they need to develop policies and practices to help prevent and respond appropriately to opioid-related overdose.”

CMS is working to enhance access to medication-assisted therapies through a more comprehensive benefit design, as well as a more robust application of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act.

“Appropriate access to medication-assisted therapies under Medicaid is a key piece of the strategy to address the rising rate of death from overdoses of prescription opioids,” said co-author Stephen Cha, M.D., M.H.S., chief medical officer for the Center for Medicaid and CHIP [Children’s Health Insurance Program] Services at CMS. “CMS is collaborating closely with partners across the country, inside and outside government, to improve care to address this widespread problem.”

However, the authors point out that success of these strategies requires engagement and participation of the medical community.

The growing availability of prescription opioids has increased risks for people undergoing treatment for pain and created an environment and marketplace of diversion, where people who are not seeking these medications for medical reasons abuse and sell the drugs because they can produce a high.

The press release can be accessed at: http://www.nih.gov/news/health/apr2014/nida-24.htm

The New England Journal of Medicine article can be accessed at: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1402780?query=featured_home

Source: National Institutes of Health – April 24, 2014

Medication Assisted Treatment: A Standard of Care. An interview with Elinore McCance-Katz, MD, PhD, Chief Medical Officer, SAMHSA

Edit-Dr.M-KNote: This interview was issued by SAMHSA’s HRSA Center for Integrated Health Solutions in their February 2014 eSolutions newsletter.

“We have a huge need in our country to treat mental health and substance use concerns, and we have a chronic shortage of specialty care programs with enough capacity to treat everyone with a substance use concern. It is our responsibility to expand access to this care in a way that allows greater choice of where individuals can receive treatment.

With the Affordable Care Act, the treatment of substance use disorders is now an essential benefit. Individuals with multiple complex healthcare needs, including mental health and substance use concerns, can be seen in integrated care settings and health homes.

We are going to see more and more integrated care. All healthcare providers, whether in primary care, mental health, or substance use treatment, will need to learn how to provide treatment for disorders they may not have historically treated. Providers who are not used to treating patients with certain types of problems may not feel confident about providing care. When that happens, the individual is less likely to get the care they need. Primary care providers especially will need to be ready to assess and provide treatment for clients who present with mental health and substance use concerns.

The Need for Medication Assisted Treatment

Medication assisted treatment (MAT) is a standard of care. There are a variety of medications that have been shown to be effective in treating substance use disorders and that can be used safely. Specifically, there are a number of FDA-approved medications for tobacco, alcohol and opioid abuse treatments.

MAT is an effective form of care, when medication is taken as prescribed, used properly, and the individual is engaged with other supports and services. With opioid use disorders, studies show that clients who get medical detoxification only have a greater than 90% relapse rate.

We have to think about how effective the treatment is, what the alternative is if not treated, and where an individual is in their recovery. Individuals with chronic relapsing diseases should have access to MAT. It’s just the standard of care. We cannot diminish the importance of that.

Substance use disorders are not simply treated by taking a medication. In fact, taking medications can be part of the problem. Just giving someone medication is not enough. Psychosocial interventions, counseling, and other services are absolutely necessary and will always be very important.

Integrated care providers are going to have to learn about how to use these medications. Many medications can be used within primary care. We’re going to see a spectrum of severity with clients in primary care. Some may need referral to specialty care and others can be treated at the primary care organization.”

The interview can be accessed at: http://www.atforum.com/addiction-resources/documents/SAMHSA-MAT-A-Standard-of-Care-Feb-2014.pdf

Source: The Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration – February 2014

Buprenorphine Prescribing ‘Disappointingly Low’

Buprenorphine Prescribing ‘Disappointingly Low’

“Few family doctors who complete the required training to prescribe buprenorphine for opioid-addicted patients actually do, new research shows.

A study conducted by researchers at the University of Washington in Seattle showed that following completion of training, fewer than a third of physicians reported prescribing buprenorphine to treat addiction.”

“It’s actually quite frustrating because the problem of opioid addiction has grown enormously in the US over the last 15 years, to the extent that unintentional lethal overdoses from opioids now exceed the number of deaths from car accidents,” study investigator Roger A. Rosenblatt, MD, MPH, of the Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington, told Medscape Medical News.”

A one-time free registration is required to view the article.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/821902

The study was published online March 10 in Annals of Family Medicine.

Source: Medscape.com - March 13, 2014

From NIDA Notes: Medications That Treat Opioid Addiction Do Not Impair Liver Health

A trial that compared buprenorphine/naloxone (Bup/Nx) to methadone produced no evidence that either medication damages the liver. Researchers concluded that Bup/Nx and methadone are equally safe for the liver, and Bup/Nx may be considered a first line alternative to the more established medication for treating opioid addiction.

Dr. Andrew Saxon at the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System in Seattle, and Dr. Walter Ling at the University of California, Los Angeles Integrated Substance Abuse Program, conducted the trial with colleagues in the NIDA Clinical Trials Network. Dr. Saxon’s team randomly assigned 1,269 new patients in 8 U.S. opioid treatment programs to therapy with either Bup/Nx or methadone. The study findings reflect the experiences of 731 patients who provided blood samples for liver function tests at baseline, completed the 24 weeks of active treatment, and submitted blood for at least 4 of 8 scheduled tests of liver function during treatment. These tests include measuring the levels of two enzymes (alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase) that the liver releases when it is injured.

Most trial participants maintained enzyme levels that indicate healthy liver function throughout the study. In 15.5 percent, enzyme levels increased to higher than twice the upper end of the normal range, indicating some ongoing liver injury. A few patients developed extreme elevations to 10 times the upper limit of normal or had other laboratory signs of severe liver injury.

The percentages of Bup/Nx and methadone patients who experienced each outcome were so close as to be statistically equivalent, warranting the conclusion that both medications were similarly safe. Although the researchers could not definitively rule out the possibility that the medications contributed to some of the observed worsening of liver function, their analysis produced no evidence to this effect. Instead, they say the changes most likely resulted from hepatitis, the toxicity of illicit drugs, and impurities in those drugs. Infection with hepatitis B or C doubled a patient’s odds of a significant change in enzyme levels and was the only predictor of worsening liver function. Most extreme increases in enzyme levels occurred when a patient seroconverted to hepatitis B or C, or used illicit drugs during the study.

The researchers note that about 44 percent of those screened for the study did not meet its enrollment criteria, suggesting that the participant group was healthier than many who visit clinics for addiction treatment. The ineligible population was also older, had a higher rate of stimulant use, and was less likely to be white than patients in the enrolled group, suggesting that the evaluable patient group might not be representative of all opioid-dependent patient groups.

Graphs available at: http://www.drugabuse.gov/news-events/nida-notes/2013/12/medications-treat-opioid-addiction-do-not-impair-liver-health

Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Notes – December 2013

Q & A – Methadone or Buprenorphine for Maintenance Therapy of Opioid Addiction: What’s the Right Duration?

question boxQuestion: How long should patients with opioid addiction be treated with methadone or buprenorphine?

Response from Michael G. O’Neil, PharmD Professor, Department of Pharmacy Practice; Consultant, Drug Diversion and Substance Abuse, South College School of Pharmacy, Knoxville, Tennessee

“Data supporting positive long-term outcomes after definitive discontinuation of methadone or buprenorphine in a predetermined time frame for all patients are lacking. Prudent clinical practice dictates that duration of therapy should be individualized by well-trained addiction specialists, taking into account a disease treatment history that includes such factors as relapse, individual patient characteristics, evidence-based literature, patient adherence, socioeconomic characteristics, and environmental considerations until long-term evidence-based studies prove otherwise.

In summary, the complexities of the disease of opioid addiction have created a frustrating situation for practitioners and patients alike. Basic practice principles for chronic diseases, such as hypertension or schizophrenia, should be applied to patients who are unable to stay in recovery using abstinence programs alone. Strict discontinuance of opioid maintenance therapy solely on the basis of duration of treatment is not clinically justifiable at this time. Individualization of treatment for opioid addiction with methadone or buprenorphine by qualified specialists is necessary for many suffering patients, in conjunction with counseling, community support, or behavioral interventions. Treatment cultures for opioid addiction need to continue to evolve, as does education of the general public.”

The article can be accessed at: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/819875

Source: www.Medscape.com - February 3, 2014

SAMHSA’s New Report Tracks the Behavioral Health of America

 

samhsa“A new report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) illuminates important trends – many positive — in Americans’ behavioral health, both nationally and on a state-by-state basis.

SAMHSA’s new report, the “National Behavioral Health Barometer” (Barometer), provides data about key indicators of behavioral health problems including rates of serious mental illness, suicidal thoughts, substance abuse, underage drinking, and the percentages of those who seek treatment for these disorders. The Barometer shows this data at the national level, and for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The Barometer indicates that the behavioral health of our nation is improving in some areas. For example, the rate of prescription pain reliever abuse has fallen for both children ages 12-17 and adults ages 18-25 from 2007 to 2011 (9.2 percent to 8.7 percent and 12.0 percent to 9.8 percent respectively).

In the United States, only 14.8% of persons aged 12 or older with illicit drug dependence or abuse (an estimated 1.1 million individuals) in 2012 received treatment for their illicit drug use within the year prior to being surveyed.

The Barometer also shows more people are getting the help they need in some crucial areas. A case in point is that the number of people getting buprenorphine treatment for a heroin addiction has jumped 400 percent from 2006 to 2010. In 2012 the number of people who received buprenorphine as part of their substance abuse treatment was 39, 223. The number of people who received methadone as part of their substance abuse treatment was 311,718 in 2012.

The data in the Barometer is drawn from various federal surveys and provides both a snapshot of the current status of behavioral health nationally and by state, and trend data on some of these key behavioral health issues over time. The findings will be enormously helpful to decision makers at all levels who are seeking to reduce the impact of substance abuse and mental illness on America’s communities.

“The Barometer is a dynamic new tool providing important insight into the “real world’ implications of behavioral health issues in communities across our nation,” said SAMHSA’s Administrator, Pamela S. Hyde.”Unlike many behavioral health reports, its focus is not only on what is going wrong in terms of behavioral health, but what is improving and how communities might build on that progress.”

The Barometer also provides analyses by gender, age group and race/ethnicity, where possible, to further help public health authorities more effectively identify and address behavioral health issues occurring within their communities, and to serve as a basis for tracking and addressing behavioral health disparities.”

To view and download copies of the national or any state Behavioral Health Barometer, please visit the SAMHSA web site at http://store.samhsa.gov/product/SMA13-4796?from=carousel&position=1&date=0130214

http://www.samhsa.gov/newsroom/advisories/1401301041.aspx

Source: – Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration – 1/31/14

MAT With Methadone or Buprenorphine: Assessing the Evidence for Effectiveness

evidenceIt’s not surprising that a thorough review of the efficacy of medication-assisted treatment (MAT) with methadone or buprenorphine reveals  a high level of evidence for the positive impact of MAT in keeping patients in treatment and reducing or eliminating illicit opioid use.

What is surprising is that the stigma against MAT persists—even though evidence suggests that methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) has a positive impact on drug-related HIV risk behaviors and criminal activity—and thus could make clinic neighborhoods safer, rather than less desirable.

The research findings on MMT and buprenorphine or buprenorphine-naloxone maintenance treatment (BMT) were published in November 2013 in two peer-reviewed articles (see References) as part of the Assessing the Evidence Base (AEB) Series sponsored by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).

The Assessing the Evidence Base Series

SAMHSA sponsored the AEB Series to help guide providers’ decisions about which behavioral health services public and commercially funded plans should cover. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) greatly expands health care coverage and provides the opportunity “for federal and state agencies to work with private and nonprofit sectors to transform the American health care system” by developing a comprehensive set of community-based, recovery-oriented, and evidence-based services for people with mental and substance use disorders. The ACA doesn’t specify specific treatments, leaving the decision to federal, state, and local agencies, managed care organizations, and commercial and private insurers.

Deciding which services have verified effectiveness isn’t an easy task. To help in the decision-making process, the AEB Series provides a literature evaluation for 14 behavioral health services. For people with substance use disorders, they include, in addition to MMT and BMT, residential treatment, peer-recovery support, and intensive outpatient programs. The goal of the AEB Series is “to provide a framework for decision makers to build a modern addictions and mental health service system for the people who use these services and the people who provide them.”

The Studies

Authors of the MMT and BMT studies searched major databases and other sources to review meta-analyses, reviews, and individual studies from 1995 through 2012.

In brief, the studies found that with adequate dosing, MMT (> 60 mg) and BMT (16 mg-32 mg) caused a similar reduction in illicit opioid use, but MMT was associated with better treatment retention and BMT with a lower risk of adverse events. In pregnancy, MMT and BMT (without naltrexone) showed similar efficacy, but MMT was better than BMT in retaining pregnant women in treatment, and BMT was associated with improved maternal and fetal outcomes, compared to no MAT.

MMT and BMT showed similar occurrence rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome, “but symptoms were less severe for infants whose mothers were treated with BMT.” BMT is associated with a lower risk of adverse events, and has the advantage of greater availability (office facilities improve access and provide earlier care). MMT may be needed for patients who require high doses of opioid agonist treatment, and has the advantage of a possible positive effect on mortality, drug-related HIV risk behaviors, and criminal activity.

The authors advise that MMT “should be a covered service available to all individuals,” and that BMT “should be considered for inclusion as a covered benefit.”

Sprinkled within the two articles are qualifiers such as “possible,” “associated with,” and “suggestive.” That’s because the statistical significance shown in some large, well-designed studies tends to disappear when data from individual studies are merged. Merging changes drug dosages, length of treatment, patient characteristics of the group, and other data; these changes may make reaching statistical significance impossible.

Areas for Future Research

The authors identified several areas where additional data would be helpful. For methadone, these include the impact of MMT on secondary outcomes, the efficacy and safety tradeoffs of doses > 100 mg, and confirmation of results of interim treatment for improved outcome. (In interim treatment, patients receive methadone daily under supervision for up to 120 days, and emergency counseling, while awaiting placement in a program.)  Another research area: the use of MMT in subpopulations—racial and ethnic minority groups, and people who misuse prescription drugs.

For buprenorphine, suggested research areas include the impact of BMT on secondary outcomes, appropriate dosing to enhance outcomes, and confirmation of stepped-care results. (Stepped-care involves gradually increasing buprenorphine doses to 32 mg—higher doses “do not provide additional efficacy;” patients requiring more medication are switched—“stepped-up”—to high-dose methadone.) Other research areas: the use of BMT in subpopulations (described above), and improved induction protocols to minimize retention problems.

A box in each publication summarizes the authors’ findings for each treatment. We reproduce them below, as they appeared in print.

 

Evidence for the effectiveness of MMT: high

Evidence clearly shows that MMT has a positive impacta on:

  • Retention in treatment
  • Illicit opioid use

Evidence is less clear but suggestive that MMT has a positive impact on:

  • Mortality
  • Illicit drug use (non-opioid)
  • Drug-related HIV risk behaviorsb
  • Criminal activity

Evidence suggests that MMT has little impact on:

  • Sex-related HIV risk behaviorsc

 

a Compared with placebo, detoxification, drug-free rehabilitation, or wait-listing
b Sharing injection equipment.
c Having unprotected sexual relations.

 

Evidence for the effectiveness of BMT: high

Evidence clearly shows that BMT has a positive impact compared with placebo on:

  • Retention in treatment
  • Illicit opioid use

Evidence is mixed for its impact on:

  • Non-opioid illicit drug use

 

Regarding retention in treatment and illicit opioid use, BMT had a positive effect compared to placebo, while MMT had a positive effect compared to placebo, detoxification, drug-free protocols, or wait-listing protocols.

Closing Statements

The authors note the importance of MAT, especially considering the poor success rates of abstinence-based treatments, and recognize both MMT and BMT as important treatment options. Below are summaries of their closing statements.

Methadone: The authors point out the need for educating providers, consumers, and family members about the benefits of MMT and ways to avoid the significant adverse events that can occur (referring to respiratory depression and cardiac arrhythmias). They also note the need for education about “appropriate doses to improve efficacy” and “appropriate initiation to minimize adverse events.”

They close with: Because of MMT’s relative efficacy, efforts should be made to increase access to MMT for all individuals who struggle with opioid use disorders. Directors of state mental health and substance abuse agencies and community health organizations should look for methods to increase access to MMT, and purchasers of health care services should cover appropriately monitored MMT.”

Buprenorphine: Noting the key advantage of buprenorphine—its availability—and the “limited access to and more restrictive safety profile of MMT,” the authors consider BMT an important treatment for opioid dependence. “Policy makers have reason to promote access to BMT for patients in substance use treatment who may wish to choose BMT as a potentially safer alternative to MMT.

They close with: “Administrators of substance use treatment programs, community health centers, and managed care organizations and other purchasers of health care services, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial insurance carriers, should give careful consideration to BMT as a covered benefit.”

#     #     #

References

Fullerton CA, Kim M, Thomas CP, et al. Medication-assisted treatment with methadone: assessing the evidence. Psychiatric Services in Advance. November 18, 2013; doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201300235.

Thomas CP, Fullerton CA, Kim M, et al. Medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine: Assessing the Evidence. Psychiatric Services in Advance. November 18, 2013; doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201300256.

Dougherty RH, Lyman DR, George P, Ghose SS, Daniels AS, Delphin-Rittmon ME.

Assessing the Evidence Base for Behavioral Health Services: Introduction to the Series.

Psychiatric Services. 2014; doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201300214

http://ps.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleID=1759202

Walter Ginter on the Importance of Peers in Recovery With Medication-Assisted Treatment

walterStigma is a common theme among people seeking recovery from the disease of opioid addiction, but it’s particularly poignant for people in medication-assisted treatment (MAT), because stigma can itself prevent recovery from taking place. People who don’t understand MAT—and that’s a big group, including many employers, politicians, and even friends and family members—don’t believe methadone or buprenorphine treatment means being in recovery. But it does. And that’s the message that Walter Ginter, CMA, project director of Medication- Assisted Recovery Services (MARS), and the country’s foremost patient advocate, brings to patients. On December 9, he brought this message to the first White House drug policy conference.

Sponsored by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), the conference included a panel that focused on stigma and drug addiction. Michael Botticelli, deputy director of the ONDCP, and himself in recovery, invited Mr. Ginter to participate. “He called me himself to ask me to be on that panel, and afterwards I got a nice handwritten note from him thanking me for participating,” said Mr. Ginter.  Mr. Botticelli, formerly the official in charge of substance use disorder services for Massachusetts, is a strong supporter of MAT. “This direction and focus that we are seeing from the Obama Administration is encouraging,” continued Mr. Ginter “It would strengthen that effort to see Mr. Botticelli promoted and the recovery community is hopeful that he will fill the opening as director of the ONDCP.”

 Stigma Impedes Recovery

The main stigma patients face in terms of methadone comes from believing what people who know nothing about MAT tell them. They learn to believe the myth that methadone is a substitute drug, and that they aren’t really in recovery. What peer recovery support services can do for patients is to help them eliminate feelings of stigma by helping them understand that they are in treatment with a medication, just like someone with any other disease. “If people come into treatment with the idea that methadone is just substituting one addiction for another,” said Mr. Ginter, “that attitude makes them feel as if recovery isn’t an option, for them. This discouraging prospect sets the stage for a less than optimal outcome. They ask themselves what difference does it make if they use a little benzodiazepines or smoke a little pot, if recovery isn’t an option anyway? That is how stigma stops patients from achieving recovery.”

 Peers Believe Peers

Peers—other people who are in MAT—can help support patients’ recovery in a way that nobody else—not a physician and not other people who are not taking methadone—can. “In the recovery community, you always hear people say they ‘support all pathways to recovery,’” said Mr. Ginter, “but often this is just lip service and not really an endorsement, with too many anti-MAT people weighing in and adding to the stigma. A lot of people support it and understand it’s evidence based practice, but still they don’t accept it as a legitimate pathway.”

At the MARS project, patients learn from peers that methadone and buprenorphine are “not substitute drugs, they’re medications,” said Mr. Ginter. “And suddenly, that person is a candidate for recovery. Before that, they never had a choice.”

When people are given the option of being in recovery, they choose it. Once they realize that taking methadone or buprenorphine is not the same as using, they stop using other drugs and alcohol. Yes, they were in treatment, but neither the opioid treatment program nor the physician could convince them that they were in recovery—it took another person in MAT to do that. “Peers believe things from other peers that they would not believe from anyone else,” said Mr. Ginter.

 Feeling Good

One of the magical things about erasing stigma is this: Once people start to feel good about themselves, the community starts to look at them differently. That’s why one exercise patients can use is to write down three nice things that happen each day.“ At the end of a few weeks, people start to feel better,” said Mr. Ginter. “For us to do well in recovery, we have to feel good about ourselves.”

Calling addiction a brain disease—which it is—takes away a lot of guilt, said Mr. Ginter. That internal feeling of guilt is magnified by stigma coming from the outside world.

In some ways, stigma from the outside world isn’t getting any better. “There are these nice dissertations out there about your rights, but if you’re in jail because you got picked up outside your methadone clinic, you can’t tell the cop he’s wrong,” said Mr. Ginter. It would help if drug courts and parole officers saw more patients for whom treatment is working, and not just those for whom it isn’t, he added.

Finally, fear of stigma keeps people from even saying that they are on buprenorphine or methadone. Thousands of people are doing well in treatment—not just the few, like Mr. Ginter, who publicly identify themselves.

As an anecdote illustrating this, Mr. Ginter related that visitors from overseas at the MARS booth at the AATOD conference last fall were amazed that two of the people working at their display booth were patients. “They couldn’t believe that peer recovery support services were provided by ‘real’ methadone patients,” he said.

 Other Participants

The ONDCP half-day meeting also featured panels on public health approaches to drug policy, being “smart on crime” instead of “tough on crime,” with an emphasis on drug courts using MAT, and a screening of The Anonymous People. Mr. Ginter related that the drug court speaker, magistrate Alby Zweig from Denver, was shocked to hear that many of his colleagues require participants to stop using methadone or buprenorphine before they can be admitted.

Note: MARS is a project of the National Alliance of Medication-Assisted (NAMA) Recovery. NAMA chapters are small groups of individuals who organize around advocacy to teach patients about their rights and to support them in their rights. Patient advocates are not the same as peer recovery support.

For more information, go to www.marsproject.org.

Interview: Zac Talbott on Being a Patient and Certified Advocate for Medication-Assisted Treatment

Zac 2-9-14Patients and other individuals who are advocates are a growing force in medication-assisted treatment (MAT) for opioid dependence, providing information and support to patients as well as assistance to opioid treatment programs (OTPs). Advocates also are an essential link between patients and OTPs. They are not as well known as they should be, there aren’t enough of them, and they are in dire need of funding.

In January, Zac Talbott, a patient who is the director of the Tennessee Statewide and Northwestern Georgia chapter of the National Alliance for Medication Assisted Recovery (NAMA Recovery), shared his experiences with addiction, treatment, recovery, and patient advocacy with AT Forum.

 Getting Started in Advocacy: The CMA

Patients and others who want to be advocates need to first have a good knowledge of advocacy and the various issues surrounding MAT. Taking the CMA (Certified Medication Assisted Treatment Advocate) course and obtaining certification gives both patients and health care professionals the basic grounding for advocacy. Certification is essential to being a credible advocate. “There are patients out there who often are well-meaning, who claim to be advocates, but who can do harm,” he said. “A lot of folks without training do not realize that advocates have a code of ethics, and one of the main ethical guidelines is confidentiality. It goes to the heart of our professional credibility. There has never once been a case of a patient’s confidentiality being violated by a CMA working with NAMA-R.”

The second crucial skill that CMAs have is knowing how to communicate with OTPs on behalf of a patient. “You can make things worse for the patient you’re trying to help if you come off like an attack dog. Patients and OTPs agree on more than 90 percent of the issues, and that should always remain the primary focus. It’s also important to remember that the job of a patient advocate is to advocate for what the patient wants. We can’t take off and start a crusade without that patient wanting us to,” he said.

NAMA-R developed the CMA training course with no funding, which was a tremendous challenge. However, the course has been strongly supported by the American Association for the Treatment of Opioid Dependence (AATOD), and the federal Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT).

 Volunteering and Funding

Some NAMA-R chapters could do significantly more if their expenses were paid. Members are committed people who largely volunteer their time and give of themselves without any compensation.

NAMA Recovery chapters do need funding. NAMA-R is a 501c3 non-profit organization, so donations are tax-deductible. All other industrialized countries fund organizations like NAMA-R, said Mr. Talbott. “The United States is the exception. This leaves NAMA-R dependent on donations from patients, for-profit OTPs, and the pharmaceutical industry.”

In Tennessee—and in many other states—Medicaid won’t currently pay for MAT with methadone. “It’s all cash down here,” he said. The fee for patients is $300 to $400 a month—frequently all the money a patient has.

Mr. Talbott hopes NAMA Recovery can partner with OTPs for funding and support. “We had a wonderful meeting with Chief Operating Officer Jerry Rhodes and the regional managers of CRC Health Group during the AATOD Conference in Philadelphia this past November,” he said. “They recognize that advocacy is extremely important.”

 Insurance and the ACA

Whether the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will help fund MAT is still unclear, said Mr. Talbott. “It’s supposed to, but insurance companies are good at finding loopholes.” Implementation and enforcement are still problematic.

In Tennessee, for example, the state is making it impossible for new OTPs to open, which means that facilities are opening up across the state border. “Programs in other states are treating the patients that Tennessee isn’t,” said Mr. Talbott. If Tennessee Medicaid were to say that patients had to be treated in a Tennessee facility, that might make it more attractive for programs to open in Tennessee.

Even though his organization is in Tennessee, most of Mr. Talbott’s calls come from outside the state—just because there are so many patients, especially in nearby southern states, who need help. NAMA-R has always had difficulty recruiting individuals willing to make a commitment to advocacy and start a chapter. Stigma, prejudice, and just plain fear have been barriers in southeastern states.

 From Pain Medication to Heroin

Mr. Talbott’s addiction started—as with many people—with a prescription for hydrocodone for a chronic painful condition. Most people feel sick when they take opioids, but Mr. Talbott is part of the 10 percent of the population that is susceptible to addiction. “I loved them,” he said of opioids. His addiction sent him to buying pills from a pill mill and eventually to the street, where he also bought heroin. “This was in the late 90s,” he recalled. “Within eight years I went from a couple of prescribed hydrocodone a day to 25 prescribed 30-milligram doses of oxycodone.” He became an intravenous drug user within four years of initially starting the pills.

“The opposite of the stereotypical drug user,” Mr. Talbott had two college degrees when he first became addicted to opioids, and came from a well-known and well-respected family—“church folks,” he explained.

 Recovery

Then, there was treatment. “I went for all the wrong reasons—I didn’t go because I was seeking recovery,” Mr. Talbott said of his treatment in an OTP. “People who are drug users think that there’s no withdrawal, and that you might even get a little buzz.” But six months after entering the OTP and starting methadone, he found that he was in recovery—by accident. “I had no craving. I stopped using the needle. I was thinking about my life again—by accident. The person I was prior to the addiction quickly started to re-emerge. That’s the beauty of methadone.”

After that, it took Mr. Talbott a year to focus on recovery and life. “There’s so much you need to do, straightening out your credit, fixing everything you did when that disease is active.” When his addiction was at its height, he was in the middle of his masters’ in clinical social work. Ultimately, the addiction took over and he left the program. But even before his addiction, he had always wanted to be in a helping profession—a mental health counselor, an Episcopal priest, or a lawyer. “I wanted to help people,” he said. “Once I was in recovery, that part of me came back quickly.”

He found NAMA Recovery because his counselor recommended it as an alternative to driving to the clinic for four group meetings during his induction period in treatment. “I had to drive more than two hours one way to the OTP because I was so rural. So my counselor said to go to the website—methadone.org—print out, read, and bring in one of the Education Series to discuss ‘and that will count as one of your groups.’” Ultimately, he wrote to the NAMA-R chapter coordinator and said a NAMA Recovery chapter was needed in Tennessee.

NAMA Recovery’s main goal is advocacy, and that is where Mr.Talbott saw his life heading. “It’s a natural fit,” he said. “To be a MAT advocate is to advocate for the patient in treatment, but we’re not patient advocates only or specifically. ‘The patient comes first,’ as Rokki [Roxanne Baker, NAMA-R president] often says.”

 Partnership With OTPs

Patient advocates can have a lot of power, not only on behalf of patients, but on behalf of providers. When onerous restrictions are imposed by states, especially states that don’t have an AATOD chapter, providers call NAMA Recovery. “We are more than just patient advocates, we are MAT advocates,” said Mr. Talbott. “We advocate for the entire modality.”

About a third of the calls he gets—Tennessee joined AATOD just last fall—are from OTPs, said Mr. Talbott. “Sometimes patients and providers don’t have the best relationship. Some OTPs view advocates as whistleblowers and troublemakers, and sometimes the OTPs get defensive as soon as advocates call them. Several of us are trying to stress to OTPs and patients that we’re all on the same team.”

Technically, the provider advocacy organization is AATOD. But when there is an issue that draws both patient and provider complaints, Mr. Talbott reaches out to consult with AATOD president Mark Parrino or the state chapter of AATOD. “We can strategize together,” he said. Sometimes the approach involves filing a complaint with the Department of Justice or SAMHSA’s CSAT, which regulates OTPs. Often, OTPs haven’t even heard of NAMA Recovery, and sometimes haven’t heard of AATOD either, he said.

“The way to go is moving away from patient advocacy specifically and toward MAT advocacy as a modality,” said Mr. Talbott. And patients who are certified advocates can be of immense help to OTPs, whether they are testifying before the legislature or making a complaint to the Department of Justice. Patients and providers aren’t always going to agree, but ultimately they’re fighting the same battles and striving for the same goals.

Recovery Transformation in Philadelphia OTPs: Person-centered, not Patient-centered

RecoveryOver a decade ago, Philadelphia’s public health system moved toward recovery for mental health and addiction services. On the mental health side, there had been a belief that recovery wasn’t possible, especially for people with serious mental illness. On the addiction side, recovery was already in wide parlance, but the system was set up to treat the disorder as if it was acute, with no long-term or continuous follow-up care, resulting in relapses. Now, Philadelphia has taken great steps to bring along its providers in adopting a recovery-based framework. We caught up with Roland Lamb, director of addiction services for the Philadelphia Department of Behavioral Health and Intellectual disAbility Services (DBHIdS) to get an update on the recovery transformation as it affects patients in medication-assisted treatment (MAT).

“The good news is that we have moved towards more of a person-centered perspective in MAT,” Mr. Lamb said. In other words, providers are learning to look at people as people, not patients.

“We have the richest environment for MAT, with all levels of care,” he told AT Forum. He added that not only is there outpatient methadone, but there is medication-assisted treatment in all levels of care, and there are efforts to reach out to the 144 physicians in the system who are certified to dispense buprenorphine, and to provide access to those they are seeing to all of the treatment resources in Philadelphia.

The Medication ‘Culture’

But, because of the oversight and stigma, it has been a struggle to get providers to focus on the fact that people are people first, and not patients to be “dosed and monitored,” Mr. Lamb said. “The bad news is that we still have to work to overcome the stigma-driven culture of managing the medication, instead of treating addiction and focusing on recovery.”

This medication “culture” isn’t completely the fault of the opioid treatment programs (OTPs), Mr. Lamb noted. “It’s the most regulated form of treatment—in health care—that there is,” he conceded. The preoccupation with regulations, one drug after another, and the diagnosis, is at the cost of focusing on treating the addiction and supporting recovery and other needs. “People lose sight of managing the addiction.” Yes, methadone maintenance is part of recovery, but the medication isn’t the only part of it. “This treatment was created to help people get into recovery, but recovery is more than the medication alone.”

Buprenorphine—the medication—is not on the DBHIDS formulary, said Mr. Lamb. “But we do pay for all the services that surround it—the physical exams, counseling, and the drug screens.”

But whether those in care are taking methadone or buprenorphine, the focus has to be on the individual, said Mr. Lamb. “We are making sure that our providers have what they need—good assessment instruments, evidence-based practices, and psychiatric supports.”

There is a high prevalence of co-occurring mental illness in the MAT population, said Mr. Lamb. “We know a lot of what has happened with those co-occurring illnesses to those in care, who in many cases are self-medicating the very illnesses that they need help with.”

The DHBIdS meets with MAT providers every two months. These include inpatient and outpatient MAT providers, and the state licensing authority and the Drug Enforcement Administration are present as well.

No Involuntary Discharges

One of the key patient-centered initiatives in Philadelphia is this: “We say we don’t want involuntary discharging going on,” said Mr. Lamb, noting that “noncompliance” in addiction treatment is no worse than it is in treatment for high blood pressure or type II diabetes, and that terminating treatment is no solution. The reason for discharge may be violence, or threats of violence, for example, but many times this behavior is a result of untreated mental illness, said Mr. Lamb. Other reasons for discharge are drug dealing on the premises, or, of course, noncompliance with the treatment plan, but aren’t they some of the very reasons treatment is needed?

“We see ourselves as being in a partnership in terms of trying to overcome these issues,” said Mr. Lamb. The person in recovery, the providers, the regulators, and the payers all need to be at the recovery table to make this work.

Another point about person-centered care: OTPs should treat people based upon their need. For example, Pennsylvania requires two and a half hours a month of counseling—but patients should get more if they need it, said Mr. Lamb. “The issue for us is that we want to see counseling based upon the needs of the person.” That’s why the DBHIdS pays based on how much counseling is given. “We track the counseling separately.”

Training in CBT, Other Modalities

“The real challenge for us is to get staff to rethink what they’re doing,” said Mr. Lamb. “We’ve been doing it one staffer at a time.” Staffers are getting training in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), dialectal behavioral therapy (DBT), trauma, and the sanctuary model, he said. “All of these are evidence-based practices that we’ve been paying our providers to get trained in.”

There are 11 providers operating 13 OTPs in Philadelphia, treating a total of 5,000 patients a day. “When you think about it, that’s approximately 400 people coming in every day,” said Mr. Lamb. “It would be better if we could have smaller numbers of people in each facility, and more facilities.” He noted that community complaints about traffic would then go down. Of course, for that to happen, there would have to be community cooperation in siting clinics. “There is still so much stigma,” said Mr. Lamb, noting that this comes from the “outside” community and from the drug-addiction treatment community itself.

“Through a recovery focus we have a chance to change the usual ‘down with methadone’ discussion to a discussion about solutions for long-term opioid dependence and long-term recovery,” Mr. Lamb said. This is especially important now, with the burgeoning cohort of people becoming addicted via the non-medical use of prescription opioids, and their conversion to heroin. We need to do a better job of reaching out to, engaging, and retraining this population if we are going to impact the growing number of overdose deaths we are seeing, said Mr. Lamb. “We also need to evolve the recovery focus to one of wellness, and the need for those who are actively recovering to take better care of their health.”

The Joint Commission: Revised Requirements for Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs)

Joint CommissionOn January 15 the Joint Commission issued for prepublication revised requirements for opioid treatment programs that will become effective March 23. The requirements address four areas:

  • Care, Treatment, and Services
  • Information Management
  • Medication Management
  • Rights and Responsibilities of the Individual

The prepublication requirements can be accessed at:

http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/Opioid_BHC.pdf

Source: The Joint Commission – January 15, 2014

Dr. Jana Burson Blog: Who Should NOT Be in Medication-Assisted Therapy with Either Methadone or Buprenorphine?

“I spend much time and effort explaining how medication-assisted treatment for opioid addiction works for many addicts. It occurred to me that I should explain who isn’t a good candidate for such treatment.

I enthusiastically support medication-assisted treatment (MAT) of opioid addiction, but no treatment works for everyone. MAT doesn’t work for every opioid addict.” Dr. Burson offer ten reasons a patient may not be suitable for MAT including:

  • The patient isn’t addicted to opioids.
  • The patient takes opioids for pain, but has never developed the disease of addiction.
  • The opioid addict presenting for treatment has been physically dependent for less than one year.
  • The opioid addict has the ability to go to a prolonged inpatient residential treatment program for his addiction.

All this is to say that the goal of entering an opioid treatment program isn’t necessarily to
get off the treatment medication.

So if a patient seeks to enter methadone treatment but also expresses a desire to be off buprenorphine or methadone within weeks to months, I tell them their expectations aren’t realistic. These medications don’t work like that. If the patient wants to get off all medications quickly, they need referral to an inpatient program. This way, patients can’t later say they were mislead, and they feel like they have liquid handcuffs, chained forever to methadone, with its many regulations for treatment.’

http://janaburson.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/who-should-not-be-in-medication-assisted-therapy-with-either-methadone-or-buprenorphine/

Source: Jana Burson – MD  – January 5, 2014

Site last updated July 17, 2014 @ 5:55 pm