Meeting people where they're at: A focus on pharmacist harm reduction roles in the opioid crisis

Assessing pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes, and practices of opioid management within different patient populations

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in drug overdose exist, with black, indigenous, and Hispanic individuals experiencing higher rates of opioid overdose deaths. Opioid use disorder prevention services, such as opioid deprescribing and naloxone dispensing, have been identified as ways to prevent opioid overdose. Pharmacists can help use these strategies, but racial disparities in use exist.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate North Carolina (NC) pharmacist knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of opioid management practices, including opioid deprescribing and naloxone dispensing, across different racial and ethnic groups.

METHODS

This was a prospective, cross-sectional study conducted through a Web-based KAP survey distributed via e-mail to all NC pharmacists using a modified Dillman's method. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze demographics and pharmacist KAP data. Attitudes data were further analyzed using one-way analysis of variance tests and Tukey's post hoc analyses.

RESULTS

After applying exclusion criteria, 527 participants were eligible for analysis; 254 of these individuals completed the entire survey. The survey response rate was 15.3% and respondents were mostly female (59.1%) and white (86.6%). Approximately half of pharmacists knew the correct opioid morphine milliequivalent cutoffs considered to be high risk (47.7%) and not to be exceeded (51.9%). When asked about chronic opioid statistics within the United States, respondents overestimated that 23.70% of patients on chronic opioid therapy receive naloxone (SD = 18.93%). Pharmacists believed that black patients were more likely to adhere to an opioid taper than any other race or ethnicity and Hispanic patients were more likely to adhere to naloxone treatment than any other race or ethnicity. Finally, 91% of pharmacists knew what an opioid taper was, but 77% of pharmacists had never designed one.

CONCLUSIONS

Gaps in knowledge may contribute to further disparities in opioid management. Pharmacists' attitudes may contribute to biases in opioid management practices and practices related to opioid deprescribing may limit the pharmacists' current role. More education is needed so pharmacists can play an increased role in opioid management across all patient populations.

Pharmacists' perceptions of the Canadian opioid regulatory exemptions on patient care and opioid stewardship

Background:

This study explored the perceptions of Canadian pharmacists about the barriers and facilitators of providing opioid stewardship activities in pharmacy practice, considering the subsection 56(1) class exemption under Health Canada’s Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA).

Methods:

Qualitative key informant telephone interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of pharmacists from across Canada. We included community or primary health care team-based pharmacists who self-identified as having experience with providing care for patients using opioids via the exemptions. All transcripts were de-identified, and thematic analysis was conducted to identify themes. Ethics approval was obtained.

Results:

Twenty pharmacists from community and primary health care teams, from all provinces and from urban and rural practices were interviewed. The following themes emerged: 1) optimization of opioid-related patient care, 2) jurisdictional impact and 3) awareness and education. Barriers and facilitators for opioid stewardship activities were identified.

Discussion:

The exemptions facilitated the pharmacists’ ability to provide opioid stewardship and positively affect patient care by providing continuity of and timely access to care. Our research demonstrated that pharmacists can responsibly and independently manage opioid prescriptions within this expanded scope, demonstrating the valuable contribution pharmacists can have in opioid stewardship.

Conclusion:

Pharmacists were willing and able to care for patients receiving opioid medication and thereby played a role in helping address the opioid crisis. The benefits of these exemptions were demonstrated beyond situations related to the COVID-19 pandemic and warrant consideration for consistent implementation across provincial and territorial jurisdictions, thereby ensuring equitable access to care for all Canadians.

Exploration of pharmacist comfort with harm reduction behaviors: Cross-sectional latent class analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacists are positioned to play important roles in implementing evidence-based prevention and harm reduction approaches for opioid misuse and related health care outcomes such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C. More research is needed to understand how best to facilitate harm reduction practices among pharmacists.

OBJECTIVES

This hypothesis-generating study investigated (1) whether subgroups (latent classes) were observable among pharmacists based on self-reported comfort with specific harm reduction behaviors, (2) whether having reported expertise in key content areas was associated with any latent classes that might be identified, and (3) whether comfort and training were associated with actually having dispensed syringes for likely nonprescription drug use.

METHODS

This was a statewide census of community managing pharmacists in Arizona conducted from December 2018 to May 2019. Participants reported their degree of comfort with 10 harm reduction behaviors, their expertise (e.g., recent continuing pharmacy education or specialization) in selected content areas, and their syringe dispensing behavior. Additional sociodemographic information was also collected. Subgroups related to harm reduction were computed using latent class analysis, and associations between study variables were assessed using the Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

Data suggested the existence of 4 latent, comfort-based harm reduction classes: high comfort, moderate comfort, and clinical comfort, and opioid prevention only. Reported expertise in pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV was likely associated with harm reduction class. However, class membership was not associated with reporting having dispensed nonprescription syringes, although the single comfort item for syringe dispensing, by itself, was associated therewith.

CONCLUSION

Comfort with harm reduction likely clusters, so pharmacists may be broadly comfortable with topics or methods of harm reduction; however, comfort with a specific harm reduction pharmacy practice may be a better predictor of engaging in that behavior than harm reduction comfort class. In contrast, strategies to improve comfort, such as intervention development, might successfully be informed by pharmacists' latent class.