Kenneth A Feder1, Noa Krawczyk2, Brendan Saloner2. 1. Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. Electronic address: kfeder1@jhu.edu. 2. Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The American Academy of Pediatrics recently recommended that pediatricians consider medication-assisted treatment (MAT) for adolescents with severe opioid use disorders. Little is known about adolescents' current use of MAT. METHODS: We use data on episodes of specialty treatment for heroin or opioid use (n = 139,092) from a database of publicly funded treatment programs in the U.S. We compare the proportions of adolescents and adults who received MAT, first using unadjusted comparison of proportions, then using logistic regression to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: Only 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4%-3.7%) of adolescents in treatment for heroin received MAT, as compared to 26.3% (95% CI, 26.0%-26.6%) of adults. Only .4% (95% CI, .2%-.7%) of adolescents in treatment for prescription opioids received MAT, as compared to 12.0% (95% CI, 11.7%-12.2%) of adults. Regression-adjusted results were qualitatively similar. CONCLUSIONS: Regulatory changes and expansions of Medicaid/CHIP coverage for MAT may be needed to improve MAT access.
PURPOSE: The American Academy of Pediatrics recently recommended that pediatricians consider medication-assisted treatment (MAT) for adolescents with severe opioid use disorders. Little is known about adolescents' current use of MAT. METHODS: We use data on episodes of specialty treatment for heroin or opioid use (n = 139,092) from a database of publicly funded treatment programs in the U.S. We compare the proportions of adolescents and adults who received MAT, first using unadjusted comparison of proportions, then using logistic regression to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: Only 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4%-3.7%) of adolescents in treatment for heroin received MAT, as compared to 26.3% (95% CI, 26.0%-26.6%) of adults. Only .4% (95% CI, .2%-.7%) of adolescents in treatment for prescription opioids received MAT, as compared to 12.0% (95% CI, 11.7%-12.2%) of adults. Regression-adjusted results were qualitatively similar. CONCLUSIONS: Regulatory changes and expansions of Medicaid/CHIP coverage for MAT may be needed to improve MAT access.
Authors: George E Woody; Sabrina A Poole; Geetha Subramaniam; Karen Dugosh; Michael Bogenschutz; Patrick Abbott; Ashwin Patkar; Mark Publicker; Karen McCain; Jennifer Sharpe Potter; Robert Forman; Victoria Vetter; Laura McNicholas; Jack Blaine; Kevin G Lynch; Paul Fudala Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-11-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Robert P Schwartz; Jan Gryczynski; Kevin E O'Grady; Joshua M Sharfstein; Gregory Warren; Yngvild Olsen; Shannon G Mitchell; Jerome H Jaffe Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-03-14 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Avik Chatterjee; Marc R Larochelle; Ziming Xuan; Na Wang; Dana Bernson; Michael Silverstein; Scott E Hadland; Thomas Land; Jeffrey H Samet; Alexander Y Walley; Sarah M Bagley Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Adam Viera; Daniel J Bromberg; Shannon Whittaker; Bryan M Refsland; Milena Stanojlović; Kate Nyhan; Frederick L Altice Journal: Epidemiol Rev Date: 2020-01-31 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Scott E Hadland; Victoria A Jent; Rachel H Alinsky; Brandon D L Marshall; Pia M Mauro; Magdalena Cerdá Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2020-05-21 Impact factor: 5.043