Top

Addiction Science & Clinical Practice

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Buprenorphine | Research

Healthcare staff’s perspectives on long-acting injectable buprenorphine treatment: a qualitative interview study

Authors: Johan Nordgren, Bodil Monwell, Björn Johnson, Nina Veetnisha Gunnarsson, Andrea Johansson Capusan

Published in: Addiction Science & Clinical Practice | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Background

Long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB) formulations are a novel treatment approach in opioid agonist treatment (OAT), which provide patients with a steady dose administered weekly or monthly and thus reduce the need for frequent clinic visits. Several studies have analyzed patient experiences of LAIB but the perspective of OAT staff is unknown. This study aimed to explore how healthcare staff working in OAT clinics in Sweden perceive and manage treatment with LAIB.

Methods

Individual qualitative interviews were conducted with OAT physicians (n = 10) in tandem with nine focus group sessions with OAT nurses and other staff categories (n = 41). The data was analyzed with thematic text analysis.

Results

Five central themes were identified in the data: (1) advantages and disadvantages of LAIB, (2) patient categories that may or may not need LAIB, (3) patients’ degrees of medication choice, (4) keeping tabs, control and treatment alliance, and (5) LAIB’s impact on risk and enabling environments in OAT. Overall staff found more advantages than disadvantages with LAIB and considered that patients with ongoing substance use and low adherence were most likely to benefit from LAIB. However, less frequent visits were viewed as problematic in terms of developing a treatment alliance and being able to keep tabs on patients’ clinical status. Clinics differed regarding patients' degrees of choice in medication, which varied from limited to extensive. LAIB affected both risk and enabling environments in OAT.

Conclusions

LAIB may strengthen the enabling environment in OAT for some patients by reducing clinic visits, exposure to risk environments, and the pressure to divert medication. A continued discussion about the prerequisites and rationale for LAIB implementation is needed in policy and practice.

Available only for authorised users

Haight BR, Learned SM, Laffont CM, Fudala PJ, Zhao Y, Garofalo AS, Greenwald MK, Nadipelli VR, Ling W, Heidbreder C, Andersen JL, Bailey GL, Bartley SR, Biunno MJ, Boyett B, Carr JM, Cifuentes E, Duarte-Sckell SD, Dueno OR, Wiest KL. Efficacy and safety of a monthly buprenorphine depot injection for opioid use disorder: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2019;393(10173):778–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32259-1.CrossRefPubMed

Lofwall MR, Walsh SL, Nunes EV, Bailey GL, Sigmon SC, Kampman KM, Frost M, Tiberg F, Linden M, Sheldon B, Oosman S, Peterson S, Chen M, Kim S. Weekly and monthly subcutaneous buprenorphine depot formulations vs daily sublingual buprenorphine with naloxone for treatment of opioid use disorder: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178(6):764–73. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.1052.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lancaster K, Gendera S, Treloar C, Rhodes T, Shahbazi J, Byrne M, Degenhardt L, Farrell M. The social, material, and temporal effects of monthly extended-release buprenorphine depot treatment for opioid dependence: an australian qualitative study. Contemp Drug Probl. 2023;50(1):105–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/00914509221140959.CrossRef

Tompkins CNE, Neale J, Strang J. Opioid users’ willingness to receive prolonged-release buprenorphine depot injections for opioid use disorder. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2019;104:64–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2019.06.007.CrossRefPubMed

Barnett A, Savic M, Lintzeris N, Bathish R, Arunogiri S, Dunlop AJ, Haber P, Graham R, Hayes V, Lubman DI. Tracing the affordances of long-acting injectable depot buprenorphine: a qualitative study of patients’ experiences in Australia. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2021;227:108959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108959.CrossRefPubMed

Johnson B, Flensburg OL, Capusan AJ. Patient perspectives on depot buprenorphine treatment for opioid addiction—a qualitative interview study. Subst Abuse Treat Prevent Policy. 2022;17(1):40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-022-00474-2.CrossRef

Rhodes T. The ‘risk environment’: a framework for understanding and reducing drug-related harm. Int J Drug Policy. 2002;13(2):85–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0955-3959(02)00007-5.CrossRef

Jakobsen JS, Kloster ML, Christensen L, Johansen KS, Kappel N, Kronbæk M, Fahnøe KR, Houborg E. Trade-offs in substitution treatment: a qualitative study of an opioid substitution therapy clinic as an enabling and a risk-environment. Contemporary Drug Problems. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/009145092110589.CrossRef

Allen E, Samadian S, Altobelli G, Johnson J, Holmwood C. Exploring patient experience and satisfaction with depot buprenorphine formulations: a mixed-methods study. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.13616.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Chappuy M, Trojak B, Nubukpo P, Bachellier J, Bendimerad P, Brousse G, Rolland B. Prolonged-release buprenorphine formulations: perspectives for clinical practice. Therapies. 2020;75(5):397–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.therap.2020.05.007.CrossRef

11.

Larance B, Degenhardt L, Grebely J, Nielsen S, Bruno R, Dietze P, Lancaster K, Larney S, Santo T Jr, Shanahan M, Memedovic S, Ali R, Farrell M. Perceptions of extended-release buprenorphine injections for opioid use disorder among people who regularly use opioids in Australia. Addiction. 2020;115(7):1295–305. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.14941.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Treloar C, Lancaster K, Gendera S, Rhodes T, Shahbazi J, Byrne M, Degenhardt L, Farrell M. Can a new formulation of opiate agonist treatment alter stigma?: place, time and things in the experience of extended-release buprenorphine depot. Int J Drug Policy. 2022;107:103788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2022.103788.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Johnson B, Richert T. Diversion of methadone and buprenorphine by patients in opioid substitution treatment in Sweden: Prevalence estimates and risk factors. Int J Drug Policy. 2015;26(2):183–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2014.10.003.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Lofwall MR, Fanucchi LC. Long-acting buprenorphine injectables: Opportunity to improve opioid use disorder treatment among rural populations. Prev Med. 2021;152:106756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106756.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Little SC, White B, Moensted M, Butler K, Howard M, Roberts J, Dunlop A. Health and correctional staff acceptability of depot buprenorphine in NSW prisons. Int J Drug Policy. 2023;114:103978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2023.103978.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Johnson B. After the storm. Developments in maintenance treatment policy and practice in Sweden 1987–2006. In: Edman J, Stenius K, editors. On the Margins. Nordic alcohol and drug treatment 1885–2007. Stockholm: Nordic Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research; 2007. p. 259–87.

17.

National Board of Health and Welfare. Nationella riktlinjer för vård och stöd vid missbruk och beroende. Stöd för styrning och ledning [National guidelines for treatment and support in substance abuse and dependence. Support for guidance and management]. Stockholm: National Board of Health and Welfare; 2019.

18.

Andersson L. Problematisk opioidanvändning Om opioidrelaterade dödsfall och LARO i södra Sverige [Problematic opioid use. Opioid-related deaths and opioid substitution treatment in southern Sweden]. Malmö: Malmö University; 2021.

19.

Bartoszko A. Polluting pharmaceutical atmospheres: Compulsion, resistance, and symbolism of buprenorphine in Norway. Nordic Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2019;36(3):267–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1455072518814313.CrossRef

20.

Archibald MM, Ambagtsheer RC, Casey MG, Lawless M. Using zoom videoconferencing for qualitative data collection: perceptions and experiences of researchers and participants. Int J Qual Methods. 2019;18:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919874596.CrossRef

21.

Kvale S, Brinkmann S. InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks: SAGE; 2009.

22.

Rennstam J, Wästerfors D. Analyze! Studentlitteratur: Crafting your data in qualitative research; 2018.

23.

Clay S, Treloar C, Degenhardt L, Grebely J, Christmass M, Gough C, Hayllar J, McDonough M, Henderson C, Crawford S, Farrell M, Marshall A. ‘I just thought that was the best thing for me to do at this point’: Exploring patient experiences with depot buprenorphine and their motivations to discontinue. Int J Drug Policy. 2023;115:104002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2023.104002.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Johnson B, Monwell B, Capusan AJ. Long-acting injectable depot buprenorphine from a harm reduction perspective in patients with ongoing substance use and multiple psychiatric comorbidities: a qualitative interview study. Harm Reduct J. 2024 Mar 25;21(1):68. PMID: 38528531; PMCID: PMC10964574. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-024-00984-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Taylor JL, Johnson S, Cruz R, Gray JR, Schiff D, Bagley SM. Integrating harm reduction into outpatient opioid use disorder treatment settings. J Gen Intern Med. 2021;36(12):3810–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-06904-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Petersson FJM. Excusing exclusion: accounting for rule-breaking and sanctions in a Swedish methadone clinic. Int J Drug Policy. 2013;24(6):e99–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2013.10.001.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Johnson B, Richert T. Diversion of methadone and buprenorphine from opioid substitution treatment: a staff perspective. J Psychoact Drugs. 2014;46(5):427–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2014.960109.CrossRef

28.

Duff C. The drifting city: the role of affect and repair in the development of “Enabling Environments.” Int J Drug Policy. 2009;20(3):202–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2008.08.002.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Moore D, Dietze P. Enabling environments and the reduction of drug-related harm: re-framing Australian policy and practice. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2005;24(3):275–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/09595230500170258.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Frank D, Mateu-Gelabert P, Perlman DC, Walters SM, Curran L, Guarino H. “It’s like ‘liquid handcuffs”: the effects of take-home dosing policies on methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) patients’ lives. Harm Reduct J. 2021;18(1):88. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-021-00535-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Richert T, Johnson B. Long-term self-treatment with methadone or buprenorphine as a response to barriers to opioid substitution treatment: the case of Sweden. Harm Reduct J. 2015;12(1):12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-015-0037-2.CrossRef

32.

Harris J, McElrath K. Methadone as social control: institutionalized stigma and the prospect of recovery. Qual Health Res. 2012;22(6):810–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732311432718.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Stanley BL, Basu A. ‘Chemical jail’: culture-centered theorizing of carcerality in methadone maintenance treatment and addiction recovery in the United States. J Appl Commun Res. 2023;1(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2023.2180770.CrossRef

34.

Vigilant LG. The stigma paradox in methadone maintenance: naïve and positive consequences of a “treatment punishment” approach to opiate addiction. Humanit Soc. 2004;28(4):403–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/016059760402800404.CrossRef

35.

Livingston JD, Milne T, Fang ML, Amari E. The effectiveness of interventions for reducing stigma related to substance use disorders: a systematic review. Addiction. 2012;107(1):39–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2011.03601.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Friedrichs A, Spies M, Härter M, Buchholz A. Patient preferences and shared decision making in the treatment of substance use disorders: a systematic review of the literature. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(1):e0145817. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145817.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Healthcare staff’s perspectives on long-acting injectable buprenorphine treatment: a qualitative interview study
Authors: Johan Nordgren
Bodil Monwell
Björn Johnson
Nina Veetnisha Gunnarsson
Andrea Johansson Capusan
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keyword: Buprenorphine
Published in: Addiction Science & Clinical Practice / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1940-0640
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-024-00458-6

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Healthcare staff’s perspectives on long-acting injectable buprenorphine treatment: a qualitative interview study

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

“Take services to the people”: strategies to optimize uptake of PrEP and harm reduction services among people who inject drugs in Uganda

Support after return to alcohol use: a mixed-methods study on how abstinence motivation and app use change after return to alcohol use in an app-based aftercare intervention for individuals with alcohol use disorder

Patient and pharmacist perspectives on opioid misuse screening and brief interventions in community pharmacies

Pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder among adults with medical disorders in Sweden

An acute phase reaction from zoledronate mimicking symptoms seen in opioid withdrawal: a case report

Hospital admissions among patients with Comorbid Substance Use disorders: a secondary analysis of predictors from the NavSTAR Trial