An international comparative policy analysis of opioid use disorder treatment in primary care across nine high-income jurisdictions.

Health policy Health systems Opiate substitution therapy Opioid-related disorders Policy making

Journal

Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
ISSN: 1872-6054
Titre abrégé: Health Policy
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 8409431

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 Jan 2024
Historique:
received: 03 08 2023
revised: 09 11 2023
accepted: 09 01 2024
medline: 18 1 2024
pubmed: 18 1 2024
entrez: 18 1 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid-related harms are current health priorities in many high-income countries such as Canada. Opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is an effective evidence-based treatment for OUD, but access is often limited. To describe and compare OUD treatment policies across nine international jurisdictions, and to understand how they are situated within their primary care and health systems. Using policy documents, we collected data on health systems, drug use epidemiology, drug policies, and OUD treatment from Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and Taiwan. We used the health system dynamics framework and adapted definitions of low- and high-threshold treatment to describe and compare OUD treatment policies, and to understand how they may be shaped by their health systems context. Broad similarities across jurisdictions included the OAT pharmacological agents used and the need for supervised dosing; however, preferred OAT, treatment settings, primary care and specialist physicians' roles, and funding varied. Most jurisdictions had elements of lower-threshold treatment access, such as the availability of treatment through primary care and multiple OAT options, but the higher-threshold criteria of supervised dosing. From the Canadian perspective, there are opportunities to improve accessibility of OUD care by drawing on how different jurisdictions incorporate multidisciplinary care, regulate OAT medications, remunerate healthcare professionals, and provide funding for services.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid-related harms are current health priorities in many high-income countries such as Canada. Opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is an effective evidence-based treatment for OUD, but access is often limited.
AIMS OBJECTIVE
To describe and compare OUD treatment policies across nine international jurisdictions, and to understand how they are situated within their primary care and health systems.
METHODS METHODS
Using policy documents, we collected data on health systems, drug use epidemiology, drug policies, and OUD treatment from Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and Taiwan. We used the health system dynamics framework and adapted definitions of low- and high-threshold treatment to describe and compare OUD treatment policies, and to understand how they may be shaped by their health systems context.
RESULTS RESULTS
Broad similarities across jurisdictions included the OAT pharmacological agents used and the need for supervised dosing; however, preferred OAT, treatment settings, primary care and specialist physicians' roles, and funding varied. Most jurisdictions had elements of lower-threshold treatment access, such as the availability of treatment through primary care and multiple OAT options, but the higher-threshold criteria of supervised dosing.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
From the Canadian perspective, there are opportunities to improve accessibility of OUD care by drawing on how different jurisdictions incorporate multidisciplinary care, regulate OAT medications, remunerate healthcare professionals, and provide funding for services.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38237202
pii: S0168-8510(24)00003-4
doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.104993
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

104993

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest No conflicts of interest to declare.

Auteurs

Kellia Chiu (K)

Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; School of Pharmacy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Saloni Pandya (S)

School of Medicine, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.

Manu Sharma (M)

Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Ashleigh Hooimeyer (A)

School of Pharmacy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Alexandra de Souza (A)

Menzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Abhimanyu Sud (A)

Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Humber River Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. Electronic address: abhimanyu.sud@utoronto.ca.

Classifications MeSH