Table 3.

Models to Assess Odds of Selected Outcome with Access to an Addiction Specialist (versus lack of access to an Addiction Specialist (ref=0)

Outcome Assessed	Crude OR; 95% CI	Crude ρ- value*	Adjusted OR; 95% CI†	Adjusted ρ- value
Attitudes and Beliefs Regarding Caring for Patients with OUD
OUD is an outpatient issue	0.4 (0.3, 0.8)	0.004	0.5 (0.3, 1.0)	0.05
Methadone/buprenorphine is replacing one addiction for another	0.4 (0.2, 1.1)	0.07	0.8 (0.3, 2.2)	0.60
Patients with OUD are as satisfying to care for as other clinical activities	1.4 (0.8, 2.3)	0.27	1.1 (0.6, 2.0)	0.67
Current Clinical Practice Regarding Opioid-Related Care
Screen for OUD	1.5 (0.9, 2.6)	0.12	1.4 (0.8, 2.5)	0.23
Initiate buprenorphine	2.5 (0.9, 6.7)	0.08	2.7 (0.9, 8.5)	0.09
Continue prescribed methadone or buprenorphine	2.4 (1.1, 5.3)	0.03	1.8 (0.7, 4.7)	0.23
Prescribe/recommend naloxone	1.4 (0.8, 2.4)	0.22	1.1 (0.6, 2.0)	0.71
Refer patients to treatment	2.7 (1.6, 4.7)	<0.001	3.0 (1.7, 5.6)	<0.001
Hospital Systems and Processes for Providing OUD-Related Care
Feel supported to screen and to refer to treatment	4.7 (2.4, 9.1)	<0.001	4.4 (2.1, 9.1)	<0.001
Aware of local treatment resources	3.1 (1.8, 5.2)	<0.001	3.4 (1.8, 6.3)	<0.001
X-waivered to prescribe buprenorphine	1.5 (0.7, 3.3)	0.29	1.3 (0.6, 3.1)	0.49

^*P-values are based on dichotomized outcome variables

^†Each model is adjusted for the following variables reported in Table 1: residence (ref=western US); academic vs. non-academic institution (ref=academic); personal experience with addiction (ref=yes); gender (ref=male); years in practice (ref=1–5 years)