+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Access to and Payment for Office-Based Buprenorphine Treatment in Ohio

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          Office-based opiate agonist therapy has dramatically expanded access to medication-assisted treatment over the past decade but has also led to increased buprenorphine diversion.


          Our study sought to characterize physicians who participate in office-based therapy (OBT) to assess patient access to OBT in Ohio 10 years after its introduction.


          Cross-sectional telephone survey of Drug Addiction Treatment Act–waivered physicians in Ohio listed by the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT).


          This study sought to determine what proportion of eligible physicians are actively prescribing buprenorphine, whether they accept insurance for OBT, and whether they accept insurance for non-OBT services. In addition, we evaluated what physician characteristics predicted those primary outcomes. We hypothesized that a significant minority of eligible physicians are not active prescribers of buprenorphine. In addition, we expected that a significant minority of OBT prescribers do not accept insurance, further restricting patient access. We further hypothesized that a large subset of OBT prescribers accept insurance in their regular practices but do not take insurance for OBT.


          Of the 466 listed physicians, 327 (70.2%) practice representatives were reached for interview. Thirty-three physicians were excluded, with a true response rate of 75.5%. In total, 80.7% of providers reached were active OBT prescribers. Of these, 52.7% accepted insurance for OBT, 20.8% accepted insurance for non-OBT services but not for OBT, and 26.5% did not accept insurance for any services. Practices who did not accept insurance were more likely among dedicated addiction clinics located outside of Ohio’s 6 major cities. Practices who normally accepted insurance but did not for OBT services were more likely in urban locations and were not associated with dedicated addiction practices. Neither business practice was associated with physician specialty


          Access to OBT in Ohio is far lower than what the 466 listed physicians suggests. Nearly 1 in 5 of those physicians are not active OBT prescribers, and 1 in 2 active prescribers do not accept insurance for OBT. Further research is needed to determine whether practices who do not accept insurance provide care consistent with CSAT guidelines and whether such practice patterns contribute to buprenorphine diversion.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Expanding treatment capacity for opioid dependence with office-based treatment with buprenorphine: National surveys of physicians.

          Office-based treatment of opioid dependence with buprenorphine has the potential to expand treatment capacity in the United States. However, nationally, little is known about the number, characteristics, and experiences of physicians certified to prescribe buprenorphine. Moreover, little is known about the impact of easing federal regulations on the number of patients a physician is allowed to treat concurrently. To address these questions, surveys of national samples of physicians certified to prescribe buprenorphine (2004-2008) were analyzed (N = 6,892). There has been a continual increase in the number of physicians certified to prescribe buprenorphine, increase in the mean number of patients treated by physicians, and decrease in patients turned away, coinciding temporally with easing of federal regulations. In addition, most physicians prescribed buprenorphine outside of traditional treatment settings. The U.S. experiment in expanding Schedule III-V medications for opioid dependence to physicians outside of formal substance abuse treatment facilities appears to have resulted in expanded capacity.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Diversion and abuse of buprenorphine: findings from national surveys of treatment patients and physicians.

            Since 2003, buprenorphine has been approved for the treatment of opioid dependence in office-based practice. Diversion and abuse can be a threat to its continued approval under these conditions. As part of a national postmarketing surveillance program, applicants to substance abuse treatment and physicians certified to prescribe buprenorphine were surveyed about their perceptions of buprenorphine/naloxone diversion and abuse. These surveys were supplemented by information from national databases. Availability of buprenorphine/naloxone was measured by number of tablets dispensed. Measures of diversion and abuse of buprenorphine/naloxone increased from 2005 to 2009. The results from the applicant survey showed that the perceptions of the extent of diversion and abuse were lower than positive controls, methadone, oxycodone and heroin, but higher than the negative control, amitriptyline. By 2009, 46% of the physicians believed that buprenorphine/naloxone was diverted but 44% believed illegal use was for self-management of withdrawal and 53% believed the source of the medication was substance abuse patients. Other measures from national databases showed similar results. When adjusted for millions of tablets sold per year, slopes for measures of diversion and abuse were reduced. The increases in diversion and abuse measures indicate the need to take active attempts to curb diversion and abuse as well as continuous monitoring and surveillance of all buprenorphine products. However, these increases parallel the increased number of tablets sold. Finding a balance of risk/benefit (i.e. diversion and abuse versus expanded treatment) remains a challenge. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Illicit use of buprenorphine in a community sample of young adult non-medical users of pharmaceutical opioids.

              There is growing evidence about illicit use of buprenorphine in the U.S. The study aims to: (1) identify prevalence and predictors of illicit buprenorphine use in a community sample of 396 young adult (18-23 years old) non-medical users of pharmaceutical opioids and (2) describe knowledge, attitudes and behaviors linked to illicit buprenorphine use as reported by a qualitative sub-sample (n=51).

                Author and article information

                Subst Abuse
                Subst Abuse
                Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment
                Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                13 June 2017
                : 11
                [1 ]School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
                [2 ]University Hospitals Health System, St. Vincent Charity Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
                [3 ]University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
                Author notes
                CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Theodore V Parran, University Hospitals Health System, St. Vincent Charity Medical Center, Rosary Hall, 2-West, 2351 East 22nd Street, Cleveland, OH 44115, USA. Email: tvp@ 123456cwru.edu
                © The Author(s) 2017

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                Original Research


                Comment on this article