English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The current opioid crisis in the U.S. has led to an increased number of office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) programs that provide medication for opioud use disorder (MOUD) in primary care settings. MOUD (formerly known as medication assisted treatment) requires a medication and psychosocial component of care and thus, expertise from multiple types of providers. To help inform workforce development policies and strategies to train the future OBOT workforce, this study examined: (1) the provider composition of OBOT teams, (2) team members’ respective duties, and (3) communication patterns. METHODS Interviews with a convenience sample (N=12) of providers working as members of OBOT teams in outpatient primary care settings across the U.S. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Qualitative coding was used to identify patterns relevant to study objectives. RESULTS OBOT teams always included (1) a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)-waivered prescriber (typically physicians) as is mandated federally. However, other team members included; (2) a behavioral health provider (typically licensed clinical social workers); (3) a MOUD registry coordinator (varied in degree/background); and (4) other operational staff (typically medical assistants). OBOT clinics offering therapeutic behavioral interventions were more likely to employ multiple behavioral health providers, though there was variation in the types of behavioral health interventions utilized. CONCLUSION The demand for OBOT treatment teams presents a significant opportunity for interprofessional training of health professionals. Educators, policymakers, and researchers should evaluate the composition and service capacity of the current OBOT workforce in order to develop comprehensive interprofessional training programs that address the physical, psychopharmacological, behavioral health, and psychosocial components of care necessary for OUD treatment and recovery.

Interprofessional Teams and the Office-Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) Workforce