Barbara Andraka-Christou1, Adam J Gordon, Kathryn Bouskill, Rosanna Smart, Olivia Randall-Kosich, Matthew Golan, Rachel Totaram, Bradley D Stein. 1. Department of Health Management & Informatics, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL (BA-C, RT), Department of Internal Medicine (Secondary Joint Appointment), University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL (BA-C), Informatics, Decision-Enhancement, and Analytic Sciences (IDEAS) Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City, UT (AJG), RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA (KB, RS), School of Public Health, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA (OR-K), School of Law, Emory University, Atlanta, GA (MG), RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA (BDS), Program for Addiction Research, Clinical Care, Knowledge and Advocacy (PARCKA), Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City UT (AJG).
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Buprenorphine is a gold standard treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Some US states have passed laws regulating office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT) for OUD, with requirements beyond those required in federal law. We sought to identify themes in state OBBT laws. METHODS: Using search terms related to medications for OUD, we searched Westlaw software for state regulations and statutes in 51 US jurisdictions from 2005 to 2019. We identified and inductively analyzed OBBT laws for themes. RESULTS: Since 2005, 10 states have passed a total of 181 OBBT laws. We identified the following themes: (1) provider credentials: state licensure for OBBT providers and continuing medical education requirements; (2) new patients: objective symptoms patients must have before receiving OBBT and exceptions for special populations; (3) educating patients: general informed consent requirements, and specific information to provide; (4) counseling: minimum counselor credentials, minimum counseling frequency, counseling alternatives; (5) patient monitoring: required prescription drug monitoring checks, frequency of drug screening, and responses to lost/stolen medications; (6) enhanced clinician monitoring: evidence-based treatment protocols, minimum clinician-patient contact frequency, health assessment requirements, and individualized treatment planning; and (7) patient safety: reconciling prescriptions, dosage limitations, naloxone coprescribing, tapering, and office closures. CONCLUSIONS: Some laws codify practices for which scientific consensus is lacking. Additionally, some OBBT laws resemble opioid treatment programs and pain management regulations. Results could serve as the basis for a typology of office-based treatment laws, which could facilitate empirical examination of policy impacts on treatment access and quality.
OBJECTIVES: Buprenorphine is a gold standard treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Some US states have passed laws regulating office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT) for OUD, with requirements beyond those required in federal law. We sought to identify themes in state OBBT laws. METHODS: Using search terms related to medications for OUD, we searched Westlaw software for state regulations and statutes in 51 US jurisdictions from 2005 to 2019. We identified and inductively analyzed OBBT laws for themes. RESULTS: Since 2005, 10 states have passed a total of 181 OBBT laws. We identified the following themes: (1) provider credentials: state licensure for OBBT providers and continuing medical education requirements; (2) new patients: objective symptoms patients must have before receiving OBBT and exceptions for special populations; (3) educating patients: general informed consent requirements, and specific information to provide; (4) counseling: minimum counselor credentials, minimum counseling frequency, counseling alternatives; (5) patient monitoring: required prescription drug monitoring checks, frequency of drug screening, and responses to lost/stolen medications; (6) enhanced clinician monitoring: evidence-based treatment protocols, minimum clinician-patient contact frequency, health assessment requirements, and individualized treatment planning; and (7) patient safety: reconciling prescriptions, dosage limitations, naloxone coprescribing, tapering, and office closures. CONCLUSIONS: Some laws codify practices for which scientific consensus is lacking. Additionally, some OBBT laws resemble opioid treatment programs and pain management regulations. Results could serve as the basis for a typology of office-based treatment laws, which could facilitate empirical examination of policy impacts on treatment access and quality.
Authors: Colleen M Grogan; Christina Andrews; Amanda Abraham; Keith Humphreys; Harold A Pollack; Bikki Tran Smith; Peter D Friedmann Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Eliza Hutchinson; Mary Catlin; C Holly A Andrilla; Laura-Mae Baldwin; Roger A Rosenblatt Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2014 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Andrew W Dick; Rosalie L Pacula; Adam J Gordon; Mark Sorbero; Rachel M Burns; Douglas Leslie; Bradley D Stein Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: E Jennifer Edelman; Tongtan Chantarat; Sarah Caffrey; Amina Chaudhry; Patrick G O'Connor; Linda Weiss; David A Fiellin; Lynn E Fiellin Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-03-15 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Wei-Hsuan Lo-Ciganic; Walid F Gellad; Adam J Gordon; Gerald Cochran; Michael A Zemaitis; Terri Cathers; David Kelley; Julie M Donohue Journal: Addiction Date: 2016-01-30 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Stephen W Patrick; Michael R Richards; William D Dupont; Elizabeth McNeer; Melinda B Buntin; Peter R Martin; Matthew M Davis; Corey S Davis; Katherine E Hartmann; Ashley A Leech; Kim S Lovell; Bradley D Stein; William O Cooper Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-08-03
Authors: Barbara Andraka-Christou; Olivia Randall-Kosich; Matthew Golan; Rachel Totaram; Brendan Saloner; Adam J Gordon; Bradley D Stein Journal: Health Justice Date: 2022-03-31