Barriers to accessing medications for opioid use disorder among rural individuals

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Anna M. Morenz , Robin M. Nance , L. Sarah Mixson , Judith Feinberg , Gordon Smith , P. Todd Korthuis , Mai T. Pho , Wiley D. Jenkins , Peter D Friedmann , Thomas J. Stopka , Laura C. Fanucchi , William C. Miller , Vivian F. Go , Ryan Westergaard , David W. Seal , William A. Zule , Heidi M. Crane , Joseph A. Delaney , Judith I. Tsui
{"title":"Barriers to accessing medications for opioid use disorder among rural individuals","authors":"Anna M. Morenz ,&nbsp;Robin M. Nance ,&nbsp;L. Sarah Mixson ,&nbsp;Judith Feinberg ,&nbsp;Gordon Smith ,&nbsp;P. Todd Korthuis ,&nbsp;Mai T. Pho ,&nbsp;Wiley D. Jenkins ,&nbsp;Peter D Friedmann ,&nbsp;Thomas J. Stopka ,&nbsp;Laura C. Fanucchi ,&nbsp;William C. Miller ,&nbsp;Vivian F. Go ,&nbsp;Ryan Westergaard ,&nbsp;David W. Seal ,&nbsp;William A. Zule ,&nbsp;Heidi M. Crane ,&nbsp;Joseph A. Delaney ,&nbsp;Judith I. Tsui","doi":"10.1016/j.drugpo.2025.104805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Individuals with opioid use disorder living in rural areas face barriers to accessing medications for treatment (MOUD), including finding prescribing clinicians and difficulties with transportation. This study sought to describe self-reported barriers to MOUD access in rural areas and associations between desired MOUD type and barriers encountered or perceived.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We performed a cross-sectional study of Rural Opioid Initiative participants who ever used opioids and sought MOUD treatment, who were surveyed from 2018 to 2020 about access to MOUD. Multivariable logistic regressions explored the association between MOUD type and barriers while controlling for age, gender, race, and study site.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 2906 participants who used opioids and sought MOUD, 826 (28.4 %) were unable to access MOUD. In logistic regression models, lack of transportation was a more common barrier for those seeking methadone versus sublingual buprenorphine (adjusted odds radio [aOR] 1.87, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.24–2.81). A long wait list was more common for those seeking injectable naltrexone than sublingual buprenorphine (aOR 1.68, 95 % CI 1.05–2.69). Lack of doctors or programs and affordability were more common for those seeking injectable versus sublingual buprenorphine (aOR 7.84, 95 % CI 4.87–12.63 and aOR 1.89, 95 % CI 1.26–2.83, respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Access barriers vary by MOUD type for rural individuals with OUD. Compared to sublingual buprenorphine, methadone access was hindered more by transportation difficulties, while injectable long-acting buprenorphine was hindered more by affordability and finding a doctor or program. These barriers highlight the need to de-regulate and expand locations for methadone access and prescribing, and to improve affordability and prescriber uptake of newer MOUDs, such as injectable buprenorphine.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48364,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Drug Policy","volume":"140 ","pages":"Article 104805"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Drug Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395925001045","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Individuals with opioid use disorder living in rural areas face barriers to accessing medications for treatment (MOUD), including finding prescribing clinicians and difficulties with transportation. This study sought to describe self-reported barriers to MOUD access in rural areas and associations between desired MOUD type and barriers encountered or perceived.

Methods

We performed a cross-sectional study of Rural Opioid Initiative participants who ever used opioids and sought MOUD treatment, who were surveyed from 2018 to 2020 about access to MOUD. Multivariable logistic regressions explored the association between MOUD type and barriers while controlling for age, gender, race, and study site.

Results

Of 2906 participants who used opioids and sought MOUD, 826 (28.4 %) were unable to access MOUD. In logistic regression models, lack of transportation was a more common barrier for those seeking methadone versus sublingual buprenorphine (adjusted odds radio [aOR] 1.87, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.24–2.81). A long wait list was more common for those seeking injectable naltrexone than sublingual buprenorphine (aOR 1.68, 95 % CI 1.05–2.69). Lack of doctors or programs and affordability were more common for those seeking injectable versus sublingual buprenorphine (aOR 7.84, 95 % CI 4.87–12.63 and aOR 1.89, 95 % CI 1.26–2.83, respectively).

Conclusions

Access barriers vary by MOUD type for rural individuals with OUD. Compared to sublingual buprenorphine, methadone access was hindered more by transportation difficulties, while injectable long-acting buprenorphine was hindered more by affordability and finding a doctor or program. These barriers highlight the need to de-regulate and expand locations for methadone access and prescribing, and to improve affordability and prescriber uptake of newer MOUDs, such as injectable buprenorphine.
农村个体获得阿片类药物使用障碍药物的障碍
背景生活在农村地区的阿片类药物使用障碍患者在获得药物治疗(MOUD)方面面临障碍,包括找不到开处方的临床医生和交通不便。本研究试图描述农村地区自我报告的获得 MOUD 的障碍,以及所期望的 MOUD 类型与所遇到或感知的障碍之间的关联。方法我们对曾经使用过阿片类药物并寻求 MOUD 治疗的农村阿片类药物倡议参与者进行了一项横断面研究,他们在 2018 年至 2020 年期间接受了有关获得 MOUD 的调查。在控制年龄、性别、种族和研究地点的同时,多变量逻辑回归探讨了MOUD类型与障碍之间的关联。结果在2906名使用过阿片类药物并寻求MOUD治疗的参与者中,有826人(28.4%)无法获得MOUD治疗。在逻辑回归模型中,对于寻求美沙酮和丁丙诺啡舌下含服治疗的人来说,缺乏交通工具是更常见的障碍(调整后的几率[aOR]1.87,95%置信区间(CI)1.24-2.81)。与舌下丁丙诺啡相比,寻求注射用纳曲酮的患者更需要长时间等待(aOR 1.68,95% 置信区间 1.05-2.69)。对于寻求注射用丁丙诺啡而非舌下含服丁丙诺啡的患者而言,缺乏医生或项目以及经济承受能力更常见(分别为 aOR 7.84,95 % CI 4.87-12.63 和 aOR 1.89,95 % CI 1.26-2.83)。与舌下丁丙诺啡相比,美沙酮更多受到交通不便的阻碍,而注射用长效丁丙诺啡则更多受到经济承受能力和寻找医生或项目的阻碍。这些障碍突出表明,有必要取消对美沙酮使用和处方的管制,扩大美沙酮使用和处方的地点,并提高新型 MOUDs(如注射用丁丙诺啡)的可负担性和处方者的接受程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
11.40%
发文量
307
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Drug Policy provides a forum for the dissemination of current research, reviews, debate, and critical analysis on drug use and drug policy in a global context. It seeks to publish material on the social, political, legal, and health contexts of psychoactive substance use, both licit and illicit. The journal is particularly concerned to explore the effects of drug policy and practice on drug-using behaviour and its health and social consequences. It is the policy of the journal to represent a wide range of material on drug-related matters from around the world.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信