ACMT Position Statement: Buprenorphine Administration in the Emergency Department

Successful administration of extended-release buprenorphine in the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

The ongoing opioid epidemic in the United States has resulted in a substantial increase in overdose deaths and related morbidity and mortality. Given that emergency departments (ED) frequently serve as the initial point of contact for individuals experiencing opioid overdose or seeking treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), ED clinicians have a pivotal role to play in providing prompt and effective treatment for OUD. While ED clinicians routinely administer sublingual and other transmucosal formulations of buprenorphine, extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR) remains underutilized in the ED.

CASE REPORT

We present a case involving the successful administration of BUP-XR in the ED to a patient experiencing spontaneous opioid withdrawal. The patient tolerated test dosing of sublingual buprenorphine (BUP-SL) and subsequently received BUP-XR in the ED. Following this intervention, the patient was referred to the hospital-affiliated substance use disorder outpatient clinic, where he has since demonstrated successful follow-up and retention in treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our report adds to the existing limited literature on the administration of BUP-XR in the ED and highlights the need for more comprehensive clinician teaching and guidance, as well as the establishment of in-hospital protocols for BUP-XR. Despite these challenges, our case indicates that initiating BUP-XR could be a viable and effective option for ED patients with OUD.

A qualitative assessment of emergency physicians' experiences with robust emergency department buprenorphine bridge programs

OBJECTIVES

Emergency departments (EDs) are a critical point of entry into treatment for patients struggling with opioid use disorder (OUD). When initiated in the ED, buprenorphine is associated with increased addiction treatment engagement at 30 days when initiated. Despite this association, it has had slow adoption. The barriers to ED buprenorphine utilization are well documented; however, the benefits of prescribing buprenorphine for emergency physicians (EPs) have not been explored. This study utilized semistructured interviews to explore and understand how EPs perceive their experiences working in EDs that have successfully implemented ED bridge programs (EDBPs) for patients with OUD.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with EPs from four geographically diverse academic hospitals with established EDBPs. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and emergent themes were identified using codebook thematic analysis. Analysis credibility and transparency were confirmed with peer debriefing.

RESULTS

Twenty-two interviews were conducted across the four sites. Three key themes were constructed during the analyses: (1) provided EPs agency; (2) transformed EPs' emotions, attitudes, and behaviors related to treating patients with OUD; and (3) improved EPs' professional quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants in this study reported several common themes related to participation in their hospital's BP. Overall our results suggest that physicians who participate in EDBPs may feel a renewed sense of fulfillment and purpose in their personal and professional lives. These positive changes may lead to increased job satisfaction in hospitals that have successfully launched EDBP.

Perspectives on and experiences of emergency department-initiated buprenorphine among clinical pharmacists: A multi-site qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Clinical pharmacists are well positioned to enhance efforts to promote emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder (OUD). Among clinical pharmacists in urban EDs, we sought to characterize barriers and facilitators for ED-initiated buprenorphine to inform future implementation efforts and enhance access to this highly effective OUD treatment.

METHODS

This study was conducted as a part of Project ED Health (CTN-0069, NCT03023930), a multisite effectiveness-implementation study aimed at promoting ED-initiated buprenorphine that was conducted between April 2017 and July 2020. Data collection and analysis were grounded in the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework to assess perspectives on the relationship between 3 elements: evidence for buprenorphine, the ED context, and facilitation needs to promote ED-initiated buprenorphine. The study used an iterative coding process to identify overlapping themes within these 3 domains.

RESULTS

The study conducted eight focus groups/interviews across four geographically disparate EDs with 15 pharmacist participants. We identified six themes. Themes related to evidence included (1) varied levels of comfort and experience among pharmacists with ED-initiated buprenorphine that increased over time and (2) a perception that patients with OUD have unique challenges that require guidance to optimize ED care. With regards to context, clinical pharmacists identified: (3) their ability to clarify scope of ED care in the context of unique pharmacology, formulations, and regulations of buprenorphine to ED staff, and that (4) their presence promotes successful program implementation and quality improvement. Participants identified facilitation needs including: (5) training to promote practice change and (6) ways to leverage already existing pharmacy resources outside of the ED.

CONCLUSION

Clinical pharmacists play a unique and critical role in the efforts to promote ED-initiated buprenorphine. We identified 6 themes that can inform pharmacist-specific interventions that could aid in the successful implementation of this practice.

Implementing Programs to Initiate Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in High-Need, Low-Resource Emergency Departments: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that implementation facilitation would enable us to rapidly and effectively implement emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine programs in rural and urban settings with high-need, limited resources and dissimilar staffing structures.

METHODS

This multicenter implementation study employed implementation facilitation using a participatory action research approach to develop, introduce, and refine site-specific clinical protocols for ED-initiated buprenorphine and referral in 3 EDs not previously initiating buprenorphine. We assessed feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness by triangulating mixed-methods formative evaluation data (focus groups/interviews and pre/post surveys involving staff, patients, and stakeholders), patients' medical records, and 30-day outcomes from a purposive sample of 40 buprenorphine-receiving patient-participants who met research eligibility criteria (English-speaking, medically stable, locator information, nonprisoners). We estimated the primary implementation outcome (proportion receiving ED-initiated buprenorphine among candidates) and the main secondary outcome (30-day treatment engagement) using Bayesian methods.

RESULTS

Within 3 months of initiating the implementation facilitation activities, each site implemented buprenorphine programs. During the 6-month programmatic evaluation, there were 134 ED-buprenorphine candidates among 2,522 encounters involving opioid use. A total of 52 (41.6%) practitioners initiated buprenorphine administration to 112 (85.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 79.7% to 90.4%) unique patients. Among 40 enrolled patient-participants, 49.0% (35.6% to 62.5%) were engaged in addiction treatment 30 days later (confirmed); 26 (68.4%) reported attending one or more treatment visits; there was a 4-fold decrease in self-reported overdose events (odds ratio [OR] 4.03; 95% CI 1.27 to 12.75). The ED clinician readiness increased by a median of 5.02 (95% CI: 3.56 to 6.47) from 1.92/10 to 6.95/10 (n(pre)=80, n(post)=83).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation facilitation enabled us to effectively implement ED-based buprenorphine programs across heterogeneous ED settings rapidly, which was associated with promising implementation and exploratory patient-level outcomes.

Models for Implementing Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine With Referral for Ongoing Medication Treatment at Emergency Department Discharge in Diverse Academic Centers

There has been a substantial rise in the number of publications and training opportunities on the care and treatment of emergency department (ED) patients with opioid use disorder over the past several years. The American College of Emergency Physicians recently published recommendations for providing buprenorphine to patients with opioid use disorder, but barriers to implementing this clinical practice remain. We describe the models for implementing ED-initiated buprenorphine at 4 diverse urban, academic medical centers across the country as part of a federally funded effort termed "Project ED Health." These 4 sites successfully implemented unique ED-initiated buprenorphine programs as part of a comparison of implementation facilitation to traditional educational dissemination on the uptake of ED-initiated buprenorphine. Each site describes the elements central to the ED process, including screening, treatment initiation, referral, and follow-up, while harnessing organizational characteristics, including ED culture. Finally, we discuss common facilitators to program success, including information technology and electronic medical record integration, hospital-level support, strong connections with outpatient partners, and quality improvement processes.

Improving Uptake of Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine: Barriers and Solutions

Emergency departments (ED) are increasingly providing buprenorphine to persons with opioid use disorder. Buprenorphine programs in the ED have strong support from public health leaders and emergency medicine specialty societies and have proven to be clinically effective, cost effective, and feasible. Even so, few ED buprenorphine programs currently exist. Given this imbalance between evidence-based practice and current practice, proven behavior change approaches can be used to guide local efforts to expand ED buprenorphine capacity. In this paper, we use the theory of planned behavior to identify and address the 1) clinician factors, 2) institutional factors, and 3) external factors surrounding ED buprenorphine implementation. By doing so, we seek to provide actionable and pragmatic recommendations to increase ED buprenorphine availability across different practice settings.

Buprenorphine Use Trends Following Removal of Prior Authorization Policies for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder in 2 State Medicaid Programs

Question

What are the outcomes of removing prior authorizations (PAs) on buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD) in Medicaid programs?

Findings

In this cross-sectional study of Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data from 2 states, buprenorphine prescribing for OUD in the state Medicaid program of Illinois increased after removing PA requirements, whereas a similar increase was not observed in the state Medicaid program of California.

Meaning

Policies removing PA requirements for buprenorphine prescribing for treatment of OUD may improve access to OUD treatment in Medicaid enrollees.

Importance

State Medicaid programs have implemented initiatives to expand treatment coverage for opioid use disorder (OUD); however, some Medicaid programs still require prior authorizations (PAs) for filling buprenorphine prescriptions.

Objective

To evaluate the changes in buprenorphine use for OUD among Medicaid enrollees in states that completely removed buprenorphine PA requirements.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed the immediate and trend changes on buprenorphine use during 2013 to 2020 associated with removal of PA requirements using a controlled interrupted time series analysis to account for autocorrelation. Data were collected from Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data for 2 states (California and Illinois) that completely removed a buprenorphine PA during the study period, and buprenorphine prescriptions for OUD treatment were identified among Medicaid enrollees.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Quarterly total number of buprenorphine prescriptions for each state was calculated, and stratification analyses were conducted by dosage form (films and tablets).

Results

Among the 2 state Medicaid programs (California and Illinois) that removed buprenorphine PAs, there was a total of 702 643 and 415 115 eligible buprenorphine prescription claims, respectively. After removing PA requirements for buprenorphine, there was an immediate increase that was not statistically significant (rate ratio [RR], 1.11; 95% CI, 0.76-1.61) in the number of all buprenorphine prescriptions in California and a statistically significant increase (RR, 6.99; 95% CI, 4.67-10.47) in the number of all buprenorphine prescriptions in Illinois relative to the change in the control states (Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Nevada, South Dakota, and Wyoming). Additionally, there was a statistically significant decreasing trend in the number of all buprenorphine prescriptions in California (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.94) and a statistically significant increasing trend in Illinois (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19) relative to the trend in control states.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study, removal of buprenorphine PA requirements was associated with a statistically significant increase in the number of buprenorphine prescription fills among Medicaid populations in 1 of the 2 included states.

Resident attitudes, experiences, and preferences on initiating buprenorphine in the emergency department: A national survey

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to describe emergency medicine (EM) resident attitudes, preferences, and experiences around the knowledge and skills around the evidence-based treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We created an online survey that was distributed by the Emergency Medicine Residents' Association research committee listserv to approximately 6600 resident physicians at all levels of EM residency training. Data were collected between June 2020 and October 2020. This 12-question voluntary, anonymous survey included questions exploring EM resident preferences and experiences around the education and exposure to the evidence-based management of patients with OUD in the ED setting. Descriptive statistics were used.

RESULTS

A total of 288 of 6600 invited EM residents (response rate 4.4%) from 127 different EM residency programs across 38 states in the United States, District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico completed the survey. Most respondents (165/288; 57.3%) reported that it was "very important" for emergency physicians to have training to initiate buprenorphine treatment for patients with OUD. Just under half (140/288; 48.6%) reported they have or will receive X-waiver training during residency and 46.9% (135/288) reported experience prescribing buprenorphine in the ED. The estimated proportions of EM faculty at responding residents' primary teaching hospital with an X-waiver was "most or all" (48/285; 16.8%), "about half" (23/285; 8.1%), "a handful" (79/285; 27.7%), "one or two" (33/285; 11.6%), "none" (19/285; 6.7%), or "not sure" (83/285; 29.1%).

CONCLUSION

Survey results suggest that resident emergency physicians perceive the evidence-based management of OUD to be relevant to EM residency training and are interested in receiving training on initiating medications for OUD treatment in the ED. Opportunities to improve resident education and clinical use of buprenorphine during ED residency training were identified.

Identifying barriers to emergency department-initiated buprenorphine: A spatial analysis of treatment facility access in Michigan

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine/naloxone has been shown to improve treatment retention and reduce illicit opioid use; however, its potential may be limited by a lack of accessible community-based facilities. This study compared one state's geographic distribution of EDs to outpatient treatment facilities that provide buprenorphine treatment and identified ED and geographic factors associated with treatment access.

METHODS

Treatment facility data were obtained from the SAMHSA 2018 National Directory of Drug and Alcohol Abuse Treatment Facilities, and ED data were obtained from the Michigan College of Emergency Physician's 2018 ED directory. Geospatial analysis compared EDs to buprenorphine treatment facilities using 5-, 10-, and 20-mile network buffers.

RESULTS

Among 131 non-exclusively pediatric EDs in Michigan, 57 (43.5%) had a buprenorphine treatment facility within 5 miles, and 66 (50.4%) had a facility within 10 miles. EDs within 10 miles of a Medicaid-accepting, outpatient buprenorphine treatment facility had higher average numbers of beds (41 vs. 15; p < 0.0001) and annual patient volumes (58,616 vs. 17,484; p < 0.0001) compared to those without. Among Michigan counties with EDs, those with at least one buprenorphine facility had larger average populations (286,957 vs. 44,757; p = 0.005) and higher annual rates of opioid overdose deaths (mean 18.3 vs. 13.0 per 100,000; p = 0.02) but were similar in terms of opioid-related hospitalizations and socioeconomic distress.

CONCLUSION

Only half of Michigan EDs are within 10 miles of a buprenorphine treatment facility. Given these limitations, expanding access to ED-initiated buprenorphine in states similar to Michigan may require developing alternative models of care.

Descriptive Analysis of Inpatient and Outpatient Cohorts Seeking Treatment After Prescription Opioid Misuse and Medical Toxicology Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Medical toxicology expertise has expanded into the addiction medicine realm including outpatient medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and addiction treatment. Concomitantly, the emergency department (ED) and hospital are increasingly seen as important sites for the screening, prevention, and treatment of patients with substance use disorders and addiction. This analysis seeks to characterize patients seen by medical toxicologists for opioid use and opioid use disorder (OUD) in the ED and inpatient consultation setting (inpatient) versus in the OUD clinic (outpatient) setting.

METHODS

We searched the American College of Medical Toxicology's Toxicology Investigators Consortium Case Registry, a prospective, de-identified, national dataset that includes patients receiving medical toxicology consultation following prescription opioid misuse. The dataset also includes patients seen in outpatient MOUD clinics during the same period between June 2013 and November 2015. Intentional self-harm patients were excluded. We analyzed medical history, drug use patterns, and other factors with odds ratios and confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Of 110 patients identified, 60 (54.5%) were inpatients and 50 (45.5%) outpatients. Mean age (39 years), gender (68% male), and race breakdown (60% white/non-Hispanic) were similar. The outpatient group was more likely to have Medicare/Medicaid coverage (p<0.0001). By history, the outpatient group was more likely to have past alcohol misuse, intravenous drug use, prescription drug misuse, and prescription opioid misuse. Most inpatient group members sought a recreational high compared to avoiding withdrawal or treating dependence in the outpatient group.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated in the outpatient compared to inpatient setting were more likely to report adverse sequelae from their drug use including long-term drug use, depression, previous rehabilitation attempts, and seeking to avoid withdrawal.

High-Dose Buprenorphine Induction in the Emergency Department for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder

Importance

Emergency departments (EDs) sporadically use a high-dose buprenorphine induction strategy for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) in response to the increasing potency of the illicit opioid drug supply and commonly encountered delays in access to follow-up care.

Objective

To examine the safety and tolerability of high-dose (>12 mg) buprenorphine induction for patients with OUD presenting to an ED.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this case series of ED encounters, data were manually abstracted from electronic health records for all ED patients with OUD treated with buprenorphine at a single, urban, safety-net hospital in Oakland, California, for the calendar year 2018. Data analysis was performed from April 2020 to March 2021.

Interventions

ED physicians and advanced practice practitioners were trained on a high-dose sublingual buprenorphine induction protocol, which was then clinically implemented.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Vital signs; use of supplemental oxygen; the presence of precipitated withdrawal, sedation, and respiratory depression; adverse events; length of stay; and hospitalization during and 24 hours after the ED visit were reported according to total sublingual buprenorphine dose (range, 2 to >28 mg).

Results

Among a total of 391 unique patients (median [interquartile range] age, 36 [29-48] years), representing 579 encounters, 267 (68.3%) were male and 170 were (43.5%) Black. Homelessness (88 patients [22.5%]) and psychiatric disorders (161 patients [41.2%]) were common. A high dose of sublingual buprenorphine (>12 mg) was administered by 54 unique clinicians during 366 (63.2%) encounters, including 138 doses (23.8%) greater than or equal to 28 mg. No cases of respiratory depression or sedation were reported. All 5 (0.8%) cases of precipitated withdrawal had no association with dose; 4 cases occurred after doses of 8 mg of buprenorphine. Three serious adverse events unrelated to buprenorphine were identified. Nausea or vomiting was rare (2%-6% of cases). The median (interquartile range) length of stay was 2.4 (1.6-3.75) hours.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that high-dose buprenorphine induction, adopted by multiple clinicians in a single-site urban ED, was safe and well tolerated in patients with untreated OUD. Further prospective investigations conducted in multiple sites would enhance these findings.

New and Emerging Opioid Overdose Risk Factors

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to provide a review of the current literature surrounding opioid overdose risk factors, focusing on relatively new factors in the opioid crisis.

Recent Findings

Both a market supply driving force and a subpopulation of people who use opioids actively seeking out fentanyl are contributing to its recent proliferation in the opioid market. Harm reduction techniques such as fentanyl testing strips, naloxone education and distribution, drug sampling behaviors, and supervised injection facilities are all seeing expanded use with increasing amounts of research being published regarding their effectiveness. Availability and use of interventions such as medication for opioid use disorder and peer recovery coaching programs are also on the rise to prevent opioid overdose.

Summary

The opioid epidemic is an evolving crisis, necessitating continuing research to identify novel overdose risk factors and the development of new interventions targeting at-risk populations.

Sharp decline in hospital and emergency department initiated buprenorphine for opioid use disorder during COVID-19 state of emergency in California

The California Bridge Program supports expansion of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in emergency departments (EDs) and hospital inpatient units across the state. Here, we describe the change in activity before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) California statewide shutdown. Of the 70 participating hospitals regionally distributed across California, 52 report MOUD-related activity monthly. We analyzed data on outcomes of OUD care and treatment: identification of OUD, acceptance of referral, receipt of buprenorphine prescription, administration of buprenorphine, and follow-up linkage to outpatient OUD treatment, from May 2019 to April 2020. In estimating the expected number of patients who met each outcome in April 2020, we found decreases in the expected to observed number of patients across all outcomes (all p-values<0.002): 37% (from 1053 to 667) decrease in the number of patients identified with OUD, 34% (from 632 to 420) decrease in the number of patients who accepted a referral, 48% (from 521 to 272) decrease in the number of patients who were prescribed buprenorphine, 53% (from 501 to 234) decrease in the number of patients who were administered buprenorphine, and 33% (from 416 to 277) decrease in the number of patients who attended at least one follow-up visit for addiction treatment. The COVID-19 California statewide shutdown was associated with an abrupt and large decrease in the progress toward expanded access to OUD treatment.

Implementation of a Medication for Addiction Treatment (MAT) and Linkage Program by Leveraging Community Partnerships and Medical Toxicology Expertise

INTRODUCTION

Implementing a hospital medication for addiction treatment (MAT) and a linkage program can improve care for patients with substance use disorder (SUD); however, lack of hospital funding and brick and mortar SUD resources are potential barriers to feasibility.

METHODS

This study assesses the feasibility of implementation of a SUD linkage program. Components of the program include a county-funded hospital opioid support team (HOST), a hospital-employed addiction recovery specialist (ARS), and a medical toxicology MAT induction service and maintenance program. Data for linkage by HOST, ARS, and MAT program were tracked from July 2018 to December 2019.

RESULTS

From July 2018 through December 2019, 1834 patients were linked to treatment: 1536 by HOST and 298 by the ARS. The most common disposition categories for patients linked by HOST were 16.73% to medically monitored detoxification, 9.38% to intensive outpatient, and 8.59% to short-term residential treatment. Among patients linked by the ARS, 65.66% were linked to outpatient treatment and 9.43% were linked directly to inpatient treatment. A total of 223 patients managed by the ARS were started on MAT by medical toxicology and linked to outpatient MAT clinic: 72.68% on buprenorphine/naloxone, 24.59% on naltrexone, 1.09% buprenorphine, and 0.55% acamprosate.

CONCLUSION

Implementing a MAT and linkage program in the ED and hospital setting was feasible. Leveraging medical toxicology expertise as well as community and funding partnerships was crucial to successful implementation.

Physician attitudes on buprenorphine induction in the emergency department: results from a multistate survey

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Emergency Departments (ED) are rapidly becoming an important location for initiation of buprenorphine (EDBUP) for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). Previous investigations of emergency medicine physicians' perceived barriers and attitudes toward EDBUP exclusively sampled from urban, academic-affiliated physicians. We administered a multistate survey to an institutionally and geographically diverse collection of emergency medicine physicians to better understand the professional opinions of EDBUP implementation across a variety of practice settings.

METHODS

This cross-sectional survey study used an online survey instrument to convenience sample emergency medicine physicians. In order to sample from various practice environments, participants were identified from (1) statewide ACEP chapters and (2) Facebook groups exclusive to emergency medicine physicians. The survey explored physicians' attitudes of EDBUP adoption and the perceived barriers to doing so.

RESULTS

162 emergency medicine physicians completed the survey. 76% of respondents agreed that emergency medicine physicians should offer EDBUP in the treatment of OUD. When stratified by practice setting and X-waiver status, 96% of X-waivered physicians, 73% of academic physicians, 49% of non-academic physicians, and 34% of non-X-waivered physicians felt comfortable initiating EDBUP. Lack of access to outpatient MOUD referral was the most frequently cited barrier to EDBUP across all practice settings.

CONCLUSIONS

An institutionally and geographically diverse group of emergency medicine physicians endorsed substantial support for EDBUP. Emergency medicine physicians practicing in different clinical environments endorsed similar barriers to EDBUP implementation.

Barriers and Facilitators to Clinician Readiness to Provide Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine

IMPORTANCE

Treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) with buprenorphine decreases opioid use and prevents morbidity and mortality. Emergency departments (EDs) are an important setting for buprenorphine initiation for patients with untreated OUD; however, readiness varies among ED clinicians.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize barriers and facilitators of readiness to initiate buprenorphine for the treatment of OUD in the ED and identify opportunities to promote readiness across multiple clinician types.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Using data collected from April 1, 2018, to January 11, 2019, this mixed-methods formative evaluation grounded in the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework included 4 geographically diverse academic EDs. Attending physicians (n = 113), residents (n = 107), and advanced practice clinicians (APCs) (n = 48) completed surveys electronically distributed to all ED clinicians (n = 396). A subset of participants (n = 74) also participated in 1 of 11 focus group discussions. Data were analyzed from June 1, 2018, to February 22, 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Clinician readiness to initiate buprenorphine and provide referral for ongoing treatment for patients with OUD treated in the ED was assessed using a visual analog scale. Responders (268 of 396 [67.7%]) were dichotomized as less ready (scores 0-6) or most ready (scores 7-10). An ED-adapted Organizational Readiness to Change Assessment (ORCA) and 11 focus groups were used to assess ratings and perspectives on evidence and context-related factors to promote ED-initiated buprenorphine with referral for ongoing treatment, respectively.

RESULTS

Among the 268 survey respondents (153 of 260 were men [58.8%], with a mean [SD] of 7.1 [9.8] years since completing formal training), 56 (20.9%) indicated readiness to initiate buprenorphine for ED patients with OUD. Nine of 258 (3.5%) reported Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 training completion. Compared with those who were less ready, clinicians who were most ready to initiate buprenorphine had higher mean scores across all ORCA Evidence subscales (3.50 [95% CI, 3.35-3.65] to 4.33 [95% CI, 4.13-4.53] vs 3.11 [95% CI, 3.03-3.20] to 3.60 [95% CI, 3.49-3.70]; P < .001) and on the Slack Resources of the ORCA Context subscales (3.32 [95% CI, 3.08-3.55] vs 3.0 [95% CI, 2.87-3.12]; P = .02). Barriers to ED-initiated buprenorphine included lack of training and experience in treating OUD with buprenorphine, concerns about ability to link to ongoing care, and competing needs and priorities for ED time and resources. Facilitators to ED-initiated buprenorphine included receiving education and training, development of local departmental protocols, and receiving feedback on patient experiences and gaps in quality of care.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Only a few ED clinicians had a high level of readiness to initiate buprenorphine; however, many expressed a willingness to learn with sufficient supports. Efforts to promote adoption of ED-initiated buprenorphine will require clinician and system-level changes.

Buprenorphine Initiation in the Emergency Department: a Thematic Content Analysis of a #firesidetox Tweetchat

INTRODUCTION

The height of the opioid epidemic in the USA has led to an increasing call for access to medication assisted treatment for opioid use disorder, including buprenorphine initiation from the emergency department (ED). However, only a small percentage of emergency physicians feel prepared or have the necessary training to prescribe buprenorphine. Twitter has increasingly been used as a tool for medical education, and there is growing interest in using this forum to actively engage medical providers and the public. This study examined the views regarding ED initiation of buprenorphine treatment among contributors to the quarterly American College of Medical Toxicology (ACMT) tweetchat, #firesidetox, and the demographics of the participants.

METHODS

A mixed methods descriptive study was conducted to analyze individual responses and self-identified demographics among Twitter users participating in the #firesidetox tweetchat regarding the ACMT position statement about ED initiation of buprenorphine treatment.

RESULTS

This tweetchat included 86 participants, the majority of whom were clinicians in the USA. Physicians accounted for 46% of participants primarily emergency medicine physician toxicologists and authored 75% of the tweets. It consisted of 317 tweets which most frequently described clinical vignettes or experience (46%) or medical education (25%) related to buprenorphine and had themes related to treatment initiation location (ED vs outpatient vs home) (8.6%) and challenges and solutions to buprenorphine administration (8.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

A tweetchat can be used to disseminate and discuss the adoption of buprenorphine in the ED. Importantly, the tweetchat provides a forum for experts to share narratives and expertise on implementation and barriers and successes in operationalizing buprenorphine administration in emergency departments.