Neighborhood conditions are associated with health outcomes, but whether individual health behaviors are independent of or associated with the settings are not clear. We analyzed the California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) (N = 11,152) data to determine if the perceptions and behaviors of similar individuals with an income low enough to be eligible for SNAP-Ed services differed based on whether they lived in high- or low-income neighborhoods. We found that SNAP-Ed eligible individuals living in low-income neighborhoods walked for transportation more frequently (3.04 times versus 2.38 times, p = 0.001), drank sugary beverages more frequently in the past month (2.93 times versus 1.69 times, p = 0.000), and had a higher risk of obesity than similar low-income individuals living in high-income neighborhoods (0.34 versus 0.26, p = 0.012).

Rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased in older adults (age ≥ 50). Medications for OUD (MOUD) treat OUD effectively; however, limited data exist on whether older adults with OUD are provided MOUD. Using 2016-2020 claims data from Medicare beneficiaries with a new episode of OUD, we calculated rates of MOUD initiation (first dispensing within 14 days of index event), engagement (dispensing of a second MOUD within 34 days of initiation), and retention (receiving MOUD consistently over 180 days). Among beneficiaries with qualifying index events (N = 40 336), 17%, 38%, and 45% were ages 20-49, 50-64, and ≥ 65, respectively. Five hundred and three beneficiaries with a qualifying index event (1.3%) initiated MOUD, 461 (1.1%) reached engagement, and 309 (0.8%) were retained. Multivariable logistic regressions showed older age was associated with reduced MOUD initiation (compared with those aged 20-49, adjusted odds ratios [aORs] were 0.79 [95% CI, 0.64-0.98] and 0.36 [95% CI, 0.25-0.51] for ages 50-64 and ≥65, respectively). Reduced MOUD initiation was associated with female sex (aOR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61-0.89) and increasing comorbidity score (aOR = 0.76 per 1-point increase; 95% CI, 0.72-0.80). These results suggest that in addition to general efforts to increase uptake of MOUD, age-specific strategies are needed.

This cross-sectional study evaluates whether telehealth utilization is associated with changes in payer-based and rural-urban disparities in substance use disorder treatment.

BACKGROUND: Financial barriers in substance use disorder service systems have limited the widespread adoption-i.e., provider-level reach-of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for youth substance use disorders. Reach is essential to maximizing the population-level impact of EBPs. One promising, but rarely studied, type of implementation strategy for overcoming barriers to EBP reach is financing strategies, which direct financial resources in various ways to support implementation. We evaluated financing strategies for the Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach (A-CRA) EBP by comparing two US federal grant mechanisms, organization-focused and state-focused grants, on organization-level A-CRA reach outcomes. METHOD: A-CRA implementation took place through organization-focused and state-focused grantee cohorts from 2006 to 2021. We used a quasi-experimental, mixed-method design to compare reach between treatment organizations funded by organization-focused versus state-focused grants (164 organizations, 35 states). Using administrative training records, we calculated reach as the per-organization proportion of trained individuals who received certification in A-CRA clinical delivery and/or supervision by the end of grant funding. We tested differences in certification rate by grant type using multivariable linear regression models that controlled for key covariates (e.g., time), and tested threats to internal validity from our quasi-experimental design through a series of sensitivity analyses. We also drew on interviews and surveys collected from the treatment organizations and (when relevant) interviews with state administrators to identify factors that influenced reach. RESULTS: The overall certification rates were 27 percentage points lower in state-focused versus organization-focused grants (p = .01). Sensitivity analyses suggested these findings were not explained by confounding temporal trends nor by organizational or state characteristics. We did not identify significant quantitative moderators of reach outcomes, but qualitative findings suggested certain facilitating factors were more influential for organization-focused grants (e.g., strategic planning) and certain barrier factors were more impactful for state-focused grants (e.g., states finding it difficult to execute grant activities). DISCUSSION: As the first published comparison of EBP reach outcomes between financing strategies, our findings can help guide state and federal policy related to financing strategies for implementing EBPs that reduce youth substance use. Future work should explore contextual conditions under which different financing strategies can support the widespread implementation of EBPs for substance use disorder treatment.