Attitudes toward medications for opioid use disorder among peer recovery specialists

ABSTRACT

Background: Peer recovery specialists (PRSs) are substance use service providers with lived experience in recovery. Although a large body of research demonstrates the efficacy of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), emerging research suggests PRSs’ attitudes toward MOUD are ambivalent or mixed. Few studies have quantitatively assessed factors influencing PRSs’ attitudes.

Objectives: This study identifies personal and professional characteristics associated with attitudes toward MOUD among PRSs.

Methods: PRSs working at publicly funded agencies in Michigan completed a self-administered web-based survey (N = 266, 60.5% women). Surveys assessed socio-demographics, treatment and recovery history, attitudes toward clients, and attitudes toward MOUD. Multiple linear regression was used to identify factors associated with attitudes toward MOUD.

Results: A minority of PRSs (21.4%) reported a history of treatment with MOUD, while nearly two-thirds reported current 12-step involvement (62.5%). Compared to PRSs without a history of MOUD treatment, PRSs who had positive (b = 4.71, p < .001) and mixed (b = 3.36, p = .010) experiences with MOUD had more positive attitudes; PRSs with negative experiences with MOUD had less positive attitudes (b = −3.16, p = .003). Current 12-step involvement (b = −1.63, p = .007) and more stigmatizing attitudes toward clients (b = −.294, p < .001) were associated with less positive attitudes toward MOUD. Black PRSs had less positive attitudes than White PRSs (b = −2.50, p = .001), and women had more positive attitudes than men (b = 1.19, p = .038).

Conclusion: PRSs’ attitudes toward MOUD varied based on the nature of their lived experience. Findings highlight considerations for training and supervising PRSs who serve individuals with opioid use disorder.

KEYWORDS:

• Medications for opioid use disorder
• opioid
• treatment
• attitudes
• stigma
• peer recovery specialist

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services Substance Abuse, Gambling and Epidemiology Unit for their assistance with recruitment; the Wayne State University School of Social Work Substance Use Research Team for coordinating data management activities; and the study participants for their time and insight.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/00952990.2024.2332597

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by funding from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration to the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services under grant number [TI083298]. The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services approved the study design and assisted with recruitment. The content of this manuscript is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funders.