Table 3.
Number and percent of adult-focused and adolescent-serving facilities that offer maintenance medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) by facility characteristic,a unadjusted odds of offering maintenance MOUD, and test for difference between adult-focused versus adolescent-serving facilities.
| Adult-focused facilities | Adolescent-serving facilities | Test for difference between adult and adolescent facilitiesc | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N (Row %) | Unadjusted ORb for maintenance MOUD (95% CI) | N (Row %) | Unadjusted ORb for maintenance MOUD (95% CI) | p-value | |
| All facilities | 3612 (35.9%) | 816 (23.1%) | |||
| Facility ownership | |||||
| Private for-profit | 1617 (42.7%) | Ref | 226 (19.8%) | Ref | |
| Private non-profit | 1557 (30.1%) | 0.58 (0.53, 0.63) | 503 (25.2%) | 1.37 (1.14, 1.63) | <0.001 |
| State/local/tribal gov | 252 (31.0%) | 0.60 (0.51, 0.71) | 85 (21.9%) | 1.13 (0.85, 1.50) | <0.001 |
| Federal gov | 186 (67.4%) | 2.78 (2.14, 3.60) | 2 (15.4%) | 0.74 (0.16, 3.34) | 0.09 |
| Hospital-affiliated | 577 (55.5%) | 2.45 (2.15, 2.79) | 115 (48.9%) | 3.55 (2.72, 4.65) | 0.02 |
| Payment/insurances accepted | |||||
| Private insurance | 2709 (39.9%) | 1.73 (1.58, 1.90) | 765 (27.9%) | 5.92 (4.34, 8.07) | <0.001 |
| Medicaid | 2377 (39.3%) | 1.47 (1.35, 1.60) | 684 (25.9%) | 2.06 (1.67, 2.54) | 0.003 |
| Other public insurance | 2339 (38.3%) | 1.29 (1.19, 1.41) | 681 (26.5%) | 2.26 (1.85, 2.78) | <0.001 |
| Free & reduced fees | 2200 (31.8%) | 0.56 (0.52, 0.61) | 616 (21.9%) | 0.73 (0.61, 0.89) | 0.01 |
| Cash & self-pay only | 248 (41.5%) | 1.29 (1.09, 1.52) | 7 (13.2%) | 0.50 (0.23, 1.12) | 0.02 |
| Accepts government grants | 1628 (31.7%) | 0.68 (0.63, 0.74) | 479 (22.7%) | 0.97 (0.82, 1.14) | <0.001 |
| Certification, licensing, or accreditation | |||||
| By state/hospital authority | 3227 (35.8%) | 0.93 (0.81, 1.06) | 762 (24.2%) | 1.95 (1.44, 2.63) | <0.001 |
| By national authority | 2684 (51.4%) | 4.43 (4.05, 4.85) | 478 (28.1%) | 1.73 (1.47, 2.02) | <0.001 |
| US census regions | |||||
| 1: Northeast | 1034 (51.2%) | Ref | 285 (48.8%) | Ref | |
| 2: Midwest | 708 (29.2%) | 0.39 (0.35, 0.45) | 208 (24.1%) | 0.33 (0.27, 0.42) | 0.21 |
| 3: South | 1082 (36.2%) | 0.54 (0.48, 0.61) | 182 (18.4%) | 0.24 (0.19, 0.30) | <0.001 |
| 4: West | 764 (30.4%) | 0.42 (0.37, 0.47) | 137 (12.6%) | 0.15 (0.12, 0.19) | <0.001 |
| Other/territories | 24 (26.4%) | 0.34 (0.21, 0.55) | 4 (30.8%) | 0.47 (0.14, 1.53) | 0.64 |
| Levels of care provided | |||||
| Inpatient | 286 (48.8%) | 1.76 (1.49, 2.08) | 65 (50.4%) | 3.59 (2.52, 5.12) | <0.001 |
| Residential | 841 (31.0%) | 0.74 (0.67, 0.81) | 93 (22.5%) | 0.97 (0.76, 1.23) | 0.048 |
| Outpatient | 3044 (38.4%) | 1.72 (1.55, 1.91) | 759 (23.2%) | 1.13 (0.83, 1.53) | 0.01 |
Chi-square p-value statistically significant at <0.05 for all bolded OR’s
Odds Ratio reference category for facility ownership type was private for-profit status (thus the odds ratios are the odds of each other ownership type offering an maintenance MOUD compared to the odds of a private for-profit offering maintenance MOUD). Similarly for US census regions, northeast location was the reference category. For all other odds ratios, the reference category is a facility without that particular characteristic (ie. Hospital-affiliated vs. not hospital-affiliated; accepting private insurance vs. not accepting private insurance).
P-Value is derived from an interaction coefficient in an unadjusted logistic regression model that included separate terms for adolescent-serving, the particular characteristic, and their interaction; this allowed for testing whether the association with the particular characteristic differed between adolescent-serving and adult-focused facilities. No additional analyses were performed for interactions found to be significant, as the goal was to describe associations as they exist in this near universal representation of treatment facilities.