Taking on Substance Abuse in the Emergency Room: One Hospital’s SBIRT Story

Characteristics of fatal opioid overdoses with stimulant involvement in Tennessee: A descriptive study using 2018 State Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System Data

PURPOSE

Opioid overdose deaths involving stimulants are on the rise. Demographic characteristics for these deaths to be used in prevention efforts have not been established.

METHODS

We conducted a statewide retrospective study to evaluate the characteristics of fatal opioid overdoses with stimulant involvement using 2018 Tennessee State Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System data. Data sources included death certificates, autopsy reports, toxicology, and prescription drug monitoring program data. Frequencies were generated to compare demographics, circumstances, opioid history, death scene information, bystander intervention, and toxicology between fatal opioid overdoses with and without stimulant involvement.

RESULTS

A total of 1183 SUDORS opioid overdose deaths occurred in Tennessee in 2018 of which 434 (36.7%) involved a stimulant. Fatal opioid overdoses involving stimulants had higher frequencies of illicit drugs on toxicology specifically marijuana, fentanyl, and heroin compared to fatal opioid overdoses without stimulants. Fatal opioid overdoses involving stimulants had higher frequencies of scene indications of injection drug use compared to fatal opioid overdoses without stimulant involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Fatal overdoses are shifting from mainly opioid to multidrug involvement and over one-third include use of stimulants. This analysis can help public health practitioners understand the circumstances around fatal opioid overdoses involving stimulants to inform tailored prevention strategies.

A time and motion study of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment implementation in health-care settings

AIMS

Screening and brief intervention for harmful substance use in medical settings is being promoted heavily in the United States. To justify service provision fiscally, the field needs accurate estimates of the number and type of staff required to provide services, and thus the time taken to perform activities used to deliver services. This study analyzed the time spent in activities for the component services of the substance misuse Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) program implemented in emergency departments, in-patient units and ambulatory clinics.

DESIGN

Observers timed activities according to 18 distinct codes among SBIRT practitioners.

SETTING

Twenty-six US sites within four grantees.

PARTICIPANTS

Five hundred and one practitioner-patient interactions; 63 SBIRT practitioners.

MEASUREMENTS

Timing of practitioner activities.

INTERVENTIONS

Delivery of component services of SBIRT.

FINDINGS

The mean (standard error) time to deliver services was 1:19 (0:06) for a pre-screen (n = 210), 4:28 (0:24) for a screen (n = 97) and 6:51 (0:38) for a brief intervention (n = 66). Estimates of service duration varied by setting. Overall, practitioners spent 40% of their time supporting SBIRT delivery to patients and 13% of their time delivering services.

CONCLUSIONS

In the United States, support activities (e.g. reviewing the patient's chart, locating the patient, writing case-notes) for substance abuse Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment require more staff time than delivery of services. Support time for screens and brief interventions in the emergency department/trauma setting was high compared with the out-patient setting.

Cost of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment in Health Care Settings

AIMS

This study analyzed service unit and annual costs of substance abuse screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) programs implemented in emergency department (ED), inpatient, and outpatient medical settings in three U.S. states and one tribal organization.

METHODS

Unit costs and annual costs were estimated from the perspective of service providers. Data for unit costs came from 26 performance sites, and data for annual costs came from 10 programs. A bottom-up approach was used to derive unit costs and included labor, space, and materials used in each SBIRT activity. Activities included direct SBIRT services and activities that support direct service delivery. Labor time spent in each activity was collected by trained observers using a time-and-motion approach. A top-down approach used cost questionnaires completed by program administrators to calculate annual costs and included labor, space, contracted services, overhead, training, travel, equipment, and supplies and materials. Costs were estimated in 2012 U.S. dollars.

RESULTS

Average unit costs for prescreening, screening, brief intervention, brief treatment, and referral to treatment were $0.61, $6.59, $10.48, $22.63, and $12.06 in ED; $0.86, $6.33, $9.07, $27.61, and $8.03 in inpatient; and $0.84, $3.98, $7.81, $27.94, and $9.23 in outpatient settings, respectively; over half of the costs were attributable to support activities. Across all settings, the average cost to provide SBIRT per positive screen, for 1year, was about $400.

CONCLUSIONS

Support activities comprise a large proportion of costs. Health administrators can use the results to budget and compare how much sites are reimbursed for SBIRT to how much services actually cost.