The opioid crisis has had a substantial effect on women who are pregnant and parenting, focusing both public health and policymaker attention on opioids and on other substance use in pregnancy and postpartum. There is overwhelming consensus on the principle of a non-punitive approach towards substance use in pregnancy. Experts universally endorse supportive policies, which reduce barriers to care, and oppose punitive policies, which can increase the fear of legal penalties, discouraging women from seeking prenatal care and addiction treatment during pregnancy. We review the change over time in state-level policy environments around substance use in pregnancy and contrast the policy response with the principles and guidance from professional societies and federal agencies. Between 2000 and 2015, more states adopted punitive policies than supportive policies, in direct contrast with guidance from professional societies and federal agencies. The increase in punitive policies over the past two decades suggests that the gap between principles and practice is widening. Furthermore, the increase in punitive policies is occurring in the context of significant structural barriers to comprehensive health care across the woman's entire life course, a growing awareness of racial and ethnic inequities in maternal morbidity and mortality, and increasing restrictions at the state level on abortion access. Women with substance use disorder (SUD) need comprehensive, coordinated, evidence-based, trauma-informed, family-centered care. This care should be delivered in a compassionate and non-punitive environment, and clinicians, policymakers, and public health officials all have a role to play in achieving this goal.

Opioid misuse has emerged in recent years as a major public health concern in the United States, particularly for adolescents and emerging young adults. We examined the association of opioid misuse from ages 18 to 20 with four domains at age 21-22: risk behaviors and consequences; health; social functioning; and emerging adult roles. Participants were surveyed annually from 2008 through 2019. The sample includes N = 2880 youth from waves 8-11. The sample was approximately 18 years old at wave 8; 54% female, 46% Hispanic, 20% white, 20% Asian, 2% Black, and 11% multiracial. Opioid misuse was low in this general sample of young adults, with about 4% reporting misuse from age 18-20. We used latent growth curve modeling to examine how misuse from ages 18-20 was associated with functioning at age 21-22. Adolescents who reported opioid misuse at age 18 also reported more negative consequences from alcohol and cannabis use and greater odds of other prescription drug misuse at age 21-22 than those with no misuse. Those reporting opioid misuse at age 18 were also more likely to engage in sexual risk behaviors, report delinquent behavior, and have a higher likelihood of experiencing sexual victimization and engaging in sexual perpetration at age 21-22 than those with no misuse. Neither the intercept nor slope of opioid misuse was associated with depression, anxiety, physical health or ailments, satisfaction with friends, romantic relationship functioning, or emerging adult roles at wave 11. Findings highlight the importance of screening and brief intervention for adolescents reporting opioid misuse.

Although schools can improve children’s access to mental health services, not all school-based providers are able to successfully deliver evidence-based practices. Indeed, even when school clinicians are trained in evidence-based practices (EBP), the training does not necessarily result in the implementation of those practices. This study explores factors that influence implementation of a particular EBP, Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools (CBITS). Semi-structured telephone interviews with 35 site administrators and clinicians from across the United States were conducted 6–18 months after receiving CBITS training to discuss implementation experiences. The implementation experiences of participants differed, but all reported similar barriers to implementation. Sites that successfully overcame such barriers differed from their unsuccessful counterparts by having greater organizational structure for delivering school services, a social network of other clinicians implementing CBITS, and administrative support for implementation. This study suggests that EBP implementation can be facilitated by having the necessary support from school leadership and peers.

Background

Buprenorphine is a life-saving medication for people with opioid use disorder (OUD). U.S. federal law allows advanced practice clinicians (APCs), such as nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs), to obtain a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine in office-based practices. However, states regulate APCs' scope of practice (SOP) variously, including requirements for physician supervision. States may also have laws entirely banning NP/PA buprenorphine prescribing or requiring that supervising physicians have a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. We sought to identify prevalence of state laws other than SOP laws that either 1) prohibit NP/PA buprenorphine prescribing entirely, or 2) require supervision by a federally waivered physician.

Methods

We searched for state statutes and regulations in all 50 states and Washington D.C. regulating prescribing of buprenorphine for OUD by APCs during summer 2021. We excluded general scope of practice laws, laws only applicable to Medicaid-funded clinicians, laws not applicable to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and laws only applicable to NPs/PAs serving licensed SUD treatment facilities. We then conducted content analysis.

Results

One state prohibits all APCs from prescribing buprenorphine for OUD, even though the state's general SOP laws permit APC buprenorphine prescribing. Five states require PA supervision by a federally waivered physician. Three states require NP supervision by a federally waivered physician.

Conclusions

Aside from general scope of practice laws, several states have created laws explicitly regulating buprenorphine prescribing by APCs outside of licensed state SUD facilities.