Department of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy (Drs. Posen, Keller, Elmes, and Jarrett) and Department of Academic Internal Medicine (Dr. Messmer) and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Drs. Gastala and Neeb), College of Medicine, University of Illinois Chicago jarrett8@uic.edu
Drs. Posen, Keller, Elmes, Messmer, Gastala, and Neeb reported no potential conflict of interest relevant to this article. Dr. Jarrett is a consultant to Trevena, developer of an investigative agent, TRV734, for medication-assisted treatment of opioid use disorder. She receives research funding from the US Health Resources and Services Administration; the Illinois Department of Human Services; the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration of the US Department of Health and Human Services; the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation; and the Coleman Foundation.
Considering offering medical intervention for OUD to reduce mortality? It’s essential to understand the clinical benefits, limitations, and regulation of available agents.
Medication-assisted recovery (MAR)—the preferred terminology for the service formerly known as medication-assisted treatment—entails a comprehensive set of interventions for managing opioid use disorder (OUD), including medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Despite the benefits of MAR—reducing opioid use, opioid-related mortality, and health care costs1-3—only 11% of patients with a diagnosis of OUD received MOUD in 2020.3
When medication-assisted recovery services are rendered in primary care, treatment retention improves by 25%—highlighting a role for family medicine clinicians in treating OUD.
Primary care physicians, including family physicians, are well positioned to provide MAR across the patient’s lifespan. However, many family medicine clinicians do not possess the logistical knowledge or resources to implement this service.4 In this article, we describe options for, and barriers to, MAR and societal issues that have an impact on the care of these patients.
Pathophysiology of OUD
Opioids relieve pain by stimulating μ-opioid receptors and activating the brain’s reward system. These pleasurable effects motivate repeated use.5 Frequent opioid exposure causes neuroadaptation, tolerance, and dependence. For patients with OUD who are misusing illicit or prescription opioids, periods of abstinence following neuroadaptation lead to withdrawal symptoms that vary in intensity, depending on the drug, dose, and duration of use. Upregulated noradrenergic tone and dopamine deficiency manifest as numerous signs and symptoms of withdrawal, including5:
A single episode of opioid withdrawal is not directly life-threatening, but untreated episodes can progressively amplify negative feedback and reinforce continued opioid use.6 Left untreated, withdrawal can be terminal.
MAR services that integrate medical, behavioral, and psychosocial programs can reduce mortality from OUD 2-fold.7,8 A meta-analysis found that, when MAR services are rendered in primary care, treatment retention improves by 25% (number needed to treat [NNT] = 6) and ongoing illicit opioid use is reduced by 50% (NNT = 6), relative to care at a specialty clinic9—highlighting a role for family medicine clinicians in treating OUD.
All 3 US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved MOUD (methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone) reduce cravings; 2 (methadone and buprenorphine) mitigate withdrawal symptoms by activating the μ-opioid receptor; and naltrexone diminishes the reinforcing effects of use (TABLE10-12). It is crucial to recognize the pharmacologic distinctions among MOUD because untreated withdrawal syndromes increase dropout from treatment programs and subsequent relapse.13
The Hx of medication-assisted recovery
To understand the landscape of MAR, it is important to understand the history of opioid treatment in the United States. In 1966, Congress passed the Narcotic Addiction Rehabilitation Act (NARA), which secured federal assistance by which state and local governments could develop drug treatment programs.14 NARA permitted legal offenders with OUD to be civilly committed to treatment programs, rather than prosecuted. However, limited resources and a burgeoning population led, instead, to low-cost outpatient programs saddled by strict requirements that lacked a basis for improving clinical outcomes.