No evidence of compensatory drug use risk behavior among heroin users after receiving take-home naloxone

Longitudinal Assessment of Emergency Responders' Attitudes Toward People Who Overdose and Naloxone Following an Overdose Education Training

BACKGROUND

In addition to teaching overdose recognition and response, overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) trainings for emergency responders aim to improve trainee attitudes toward people who use drugs and toward naloxone. This study examines the training effectiveness long term, as well as the extent to which improvements are dependent on profession type or recent experience administering naloxone.

METHODS

A total of 774 emergency responders, consisting of law enforcement officers (LEOs) (n = 624, 81%) and emergency medical service (EMS) personnel (n = 150, 19%), attended OEND trainings and completed surveys immediately prior to ("pre") and following ("post") the training, as well as 6 months later ("follow-up"). Survey items assessed attitudes toward people who have overdosed, naloxone-related risk compensation (ie, "enabling") beliefs, and whether participants had administered naloxone since attending the training. Multiple regression and estimated marginal means were used to evaluate changes in scores.

RESULTS

Emergency responders showed improved attitudes (pre = 2.60, follow-up = 2.45, P < .001) and risk compensation beliefs (pre = 2.97, follow-up = 2.67, P < .001) 6 months following the training. Follow-up scores differed by profession, with LEOs endorsing worse attitudes (difference = 0.55, P = .013) and more risk compensation beliefs (difference = 0.67, P = .014) than EMS. In addition, having recently administered naloxone predicted more negative attitudes (EMS: difference = 0.55, P = .01; LEO: difference = 0.54, P = .004) and risk compensation beliefs (EMS = 0.73, P = .006; LEO = 0.69, P = .002) at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Six months after an OEND training, emergency responders' attitudes toward people who overdose, and their risk compensation beliefs remained improved. However, LEOs had more negative follow-up attitudes and beliefs compared to EMS. Emergency responders who had administered naloxone had worse attitudes and beliefs at follow-up than those who had not. Of note, our sample evidenced sizable attrition between pre and follow-up assessments, leaving room for selection bias. Future studies should investigate how to mitigate negative effects of administering naloxone on attitudes toward those who overdose, and belief that naloxone is "enabling."

A systematic review exploring healthcare professionals' perceptions of take-home naloxone dispensing in acute care areas

AIMS

To explore healthcare professionals' perceptions and experiences of take-home naloxone initiatives in acute care settings to gain an understanding of issues facilitating or impeding dispensing.

DESIGN

Systematic literature review.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane, MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched from 15/03/2021 to 18/03/2021, with a follow-up search performed via PubMed on 22/03/2021. The years 2011 to 2021 were included in the search.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic literature review focused on qualitative studies and quantitative survey designs. Synthesis without meta-analysis was undertaken using a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

Seven articles from the United States of America (5), Australia (1) and Canada (1) with 750 participants were included in the review. Results indicate ongoing stigma towards people who use drugs with preconceived moral concerns regarding take-home naloxone. There was confusion regarding roles and responsibilities in take-home naloxone dispensing and patient education. Similarly, there was a lack of clarity over logistical and financial issues.

CONCLUSION

Take-home naloxone is a vital harm reduction initiative. However, barriers exist that prevent the optimum implementation of these initiatives.

IMPACT

What is already known: Deaths due to opioid overdose are a global health concern, with take-home naloxone emerging as a key harm reduction scheme. Globally, less than 10% of people who use drugs have access to treatment initiatives, including take-home naloxone. An optimum point of distribution of take-home naloxone is post-acute hospital care.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

There is role confusion regarding responsibility for the provision of take-home naloxone and patient education. This is exacerbated by inconsistent provision of training and education for healthcare professionals. Logistical or financial concerns are common and moral issues are prevalent with some healthcare professionals questioning the ethics of providing take-home naloxone. Stigma towards people who use drugs remains evident in some acute care areas which may impact the use of this intervention. Implications for practice/policy: Further primary research should examine what training and education methods are effective in improving the distribution of take-home naloxone in acute care. Education should focus on reduction of stigma towards people who use drugs to improve the distribution of take-home naloxone. Standardized care guidelines may ensure interventions are offered equally and take-home naloxone 'champions' could drive initiatives forward, with support from harm reduction specialists.

REPORTING METHOD

This has adhered to the PRISMA reporting guidelines for systematic reviews.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

The Feasibility of Using the National PulsePoint Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Responder Network to Facilitate Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The use of naloxone, an opioid antagonist, is a critical component of the US response to fatal opioid-involved overdoses. The importance and utility of naloxone in preventing fatal overdoses have been widely declaimed by medical associations and government officials and are supported by strong research evidence. Still, there are gaps in the current US national strategy because many opioid-involved overdose fatalities have no evidence of naloxone administration. Improving the likelihood that naloxone will be used to prevent fatal overdoses is predicated on facilitating an environment wherein naloxone is available near each overdose and can be accessed by someone who is willing and able to use it. How to accomplish this on a national scale has been unclear. However, there exists a national network of >1 million cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) layperson responders and 4800 emergency responder agencies linked through a mobile phone app called PulsePoint Respond. PulsePoint responders certify that they are trained to administer CPR and are willing to respond to possible cardiac events in public. When such an event occurs near their mobile phone's location, they receive an alert to respond. These motivated citizens are ideally positioned to carry naloxone and reverse overdoses that occur in public.

OBJECTIVE

This randomized controlled trial will examine the feasibility of recruiting first responder agencies and layperson CPR responders who already use PulsePoint to obtain overdose education and carry naloxone.

METHODS

This will be a 3-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial. We will randomly select 180 first responder agencies from the population of agencies contracting with the PulsePoint Foundation. The 3 study arms will include a standard recruitment arm, a misperception-correction recruitment arm, and a control arm (1:1:1 allocation, with random allocation stratified by zip code designation [rural or nonrural]). We will study agency recruitment and, among the agencies we successfully recruit, responder certification of receiving overdose and naloxone education, carrying naloxone, or both. Hypothesis 1 contrasts agency recruitment success between arms 1 and 2, and hypothesis 2 contrasts the ratios of layperson certification across all 3 arms. The primary analyses will be a logistic regression comparing the recruitment rates among the arms, adjusting for rural or nonrural zip code designation.

RESULTS

This study was reviewed by the Indiana University Institutional Review Board (20218 and 20219). This project was funded beginning September 14, 2023, by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

CONCLUSIONS

The hypotheses in this study will test whether a specific type of messaging is particularly effective in recruiting agencies and layperson responders. Although we hypothesize that arm 2 will outperform the other arms, our intention is to use the best-performing approach in the next phase of this study if any of our approaches demonstrates feasibility.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

OSF Registries osf.io/egn3z; https://osf.io/egn3z.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/57280.

Injection Drug Use Frequency Before and After Take-Home Naloxone Training

Importance

Concerns that take-home naloxone (THN) training may lead to riskier drug use (as a form of overdose risk compensation) remain a substantial barrier to training implementation. However, there was limited good-quality evidence in a systematic review of the association between THN access and subsequent risk compensation behaviors.

Objective

To assess whether THN training is associated with changes in overdose risk behaviors, indexed through injecting frequency, in a cohort of people who inject drugs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used prospectively collected self-reported behavioral data before and after THN training of participants in The Melbourne Injecting Drug User Cohort Study (SuperMIX). Annual interviews were conducted in and around Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, from 2008 to 2021. SuperMIX participants were adults who regularly injected heroin or methamphetamine in the 6 months preceding their baseline interview. The current study included only people who inject drugs who reported THN training and had participated in at least 1 interview before THN training.

Exposure

In 2017, the SuperMIX baseline or follow-up survey began asking participants if and when they had received THN training. The first THN training date that was recorded was included as the exposure variable. Subsequent participant interviews were excluded from analysis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Injecting frequency was the primary outcome and was used as an indicator of overdose risk. Secondary outcomes were opioid injecting frequency, benzodiazepine use frequency, and the proportion of the time drugs were used alone. Fixed-effects generalized linear (Poisson) multilevel modeling was used to estimate the association between THN training and the primary and secondary outcomes. Time-varying covariates included housing status, income, time in study, recent opioid overdose, recent drug treatment, and needle and syringe coverage. Findings were expressed as incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% CIs.

Results

There were 1328 participants (mean [SD] age, 32.4 [9.0] years; 893 men [67.2%]) who completed a baseline interview in the SuperMIX cohort, and 965 participants completed either a baseline or follow-up interview in or after 2017. Of these 965 participants, 390 (40.4%) reported THN training. A total of 189 people who inject drugs had pretraining participant interviews with data on injecting frequency and were included in the final analysis (mean [SD] number of interviews over the study period, 6.2 [2.2]). In fixed-effects regression analyses adjusted for covariates, there was no change in the frequency of injecting (IRR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.69-1.20; P = .51), opioid injecting (IRR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74-1.23; P = .71), benzodiazepine use (IRR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.69-1.33; P = .80), or the proportion of reported time of using drugs alone (IRR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.86-1.26; P = .67) before and after THN training.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study of people who inject drugs found no evidence of an increase in injecting frequency, along with other markers of overdose risk, after THN training and supply. The findings suggest that THN training should not be withheld because of concerns about risk compensation and that advocacy for availability and uptake of THN is required to address unprecedented opioid-associated mortality.

Preliminary effectiveness of online opioid overdose and naloxone administration training and impact of naloxone possession on opioid use

BACKGROUND

Despite the demonstrated value of opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs, uptake and utilization remains low. Accessibility to OEND is limited and traditional programs may not reach many high-risk individuals. This study evaluated the effectiveness of online opioid overdose and naloxone administration education and the impact of naloxone possession.

METHODS

Individuals with self-reported illicit use of opioids were recruited via Craigslist advertisements and completed all assessments and education online via REDCap. Participants watched a 20-minute video outlining signs of opioid overdose and how to administer naloxone. They were then randomized to either receive a naloxone kit or be given instructions on where to obtain a kit. Effectiveness of training was measured with pre- and post-training knowledge questionnaires. Naloxone kit possession, overdoses, opioid use frequency, and treatment interest were self-reported on monthly follow-up assessments.

RESULTS

Mean knowledge scores significantly increased from 6.82/9.00 to 8.22 after training (t(194)=6.85, p <0.001, 95% CI[1.00, 1.81], Cohen's d=0.85). Difference in naloxone possession between randomized groups was significant with a large effect size (p <0.001, diff=0.60, 95% CI[0.47, 0.73]). A bidirectional relationship was found between naloxone possession and frequency of opioid use. Overdoses and treatment interest were similar across possession status.

CONCLUSIONS

Overdose education is effective in online video format. Disparity in naloxone possession across groups indicates barriers to obtaining naloxone from pharmacies. Naloxone possession did not influence risky opioid use or treatment interest and its impact on frequency of use warrants further investigation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinitaltrials.gov-NCT04303000.

Feasibility and acceptability of online opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution: Study protocol and preliminary results from a randomized pilot clinical trial

Drug overdose is the leading cause of accidental death in the United States, with over 70% of drug related fatalities resulting from the use of opioids. Federal agencies have responded to this crisis with various recommendations including enhancing harm reduction approaches such as training laypersons to administer naloxone through Opioid Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) programs. Several studies have demonstrated that OEND programs effectively reduce opioid overdose mortality and are both safe and cost-effective, however, they are typically implemented in urban areas as part of large medical center research programs, needle exchanges, or drug treatment programs. Individuals living in areas without these programs or services lack access to critical and life-saving OEND. The current study examined the acceptability and feasibility of online recruitment, online opioid overdose education, and remote distribution of naloxone kits. Persons who illicitly use opioids and are at risk for overdose were recruited through online media and completed an opioid use questionnaire. If interested in receiving opioid overdose and naloxone administration training, participants completed pre- and post-intervention knowledge questionnaires, engaged in audiovisual training, and were randomized to either receive a naloxone kit or be given information on where they could obtain one. Preliminary results indicate feasibility and acceptability as evidenced by strong recruitment and retention, as well as high participant satisfaction ratings. Successful implementation of remote OEND through this project supports future employment of similar remote programs to expand this critical harm reduction strategy to high-risk individuals in areas lacking traditional OEND programs.

Trial Registration #

Clinitaltrials.gov- NCT04303000.

Modeling Opioid Abuse: A Case Study of the Opioid Crisis in New England

For the past two decades, the USA has been embroiled in a growing prescription drug epidemic. The ripples of this epidemic have been especially apparent in the state of Maine, which has fought hard to mitigate the damage caused by addiction to pharmaceutical and illicit opioids. In this study, we construct a mathematical model of the opioid epidemic incorporating novel features important to better understanding opioid abuse dynamics. These features include demographic differences in population susceptibility, general transmission expressions, and combined consideration of pharmaceutical opioid and heroin abuse. We demonstrate the usefulness of this model by calibrating it with data for the state of Maine. Model calibration is accompanied by sensitivity and uncertainty analysis to quantify potential error in parameter estimates and forecasts. The model is analyzed to determine the mechanisms most influential to the number of opioid abusers and to find effective ways of controlling opioid abuse prevalence. We found that the mechanisms most influential to the overall number of abusers in Maine are those involved in illicit pharmaceutical opioid abuse transmission. Consequently, preventative strategies that controlled for illicit transmission were more effective over alternative approaches, such as treatment. These results are presented with the hope of helping to inform public policy as to the most effective means of intervention.

Differences in drug use behaviors that impact overdose risk among individuals who do and do not use fentanyl test strips for drug checking

Background

Opioid-involved overdose continues to rise, largely explained by fentanyl adulteration of the illicit opioid supply. Fentanyl test strips are a novel drug checking tool that can be used by people who use drugs to detect the presence of fentanyl in drug products. However, it is unclear whether fentanyl test strip use can prompt behavior changes that impact risk of overdose.

Methods

In this mixed-methods study involving a structured survey (n = 341) of syringe service program clients in southern Wisconsin, we examined the association between fentanyl test strip use and overdose risk behaviors in scenarios where the presence of fentanyl is confirmed and unknown. Individual items were transformed into summary scales representing the performance of riskier and safer behaviors. Linear regression examined the association of behaviors with FTS use. Models are adjusted for study site, race/ethnicity, age, gender, drug of choice, indicator of polysubstance use, times used per day, and lifetime overdose count.

Results

In response to survey questions before prompting about fentanyl risk, people who used fentanyl test strips reported an increased number of safer (p = 0.001) as well as riskier behaviors (p = 0.018) relative to people who did not use fentanyl test strips. The same held true in situations when fentanyl adulteration was suspected, though fentanyl test strip use lost significance in the fully adjusted model examining safer behaviors (safer: p = 0.143; riskier: p = 0.004). Among people who use fentanyl test strips, in unadjusted models, a positive test result was associated with more safer behaviors and fewer riskier behaviors, but these associations became nonsignificant in fully adjusted models (safer: p = 0.998; riskier: p = 0.171). Loss of significance was largely due to the addition of either polysubstance use or age to the model.

Conclusions

Fentanyl test strip use is associated with behaviors that may impact overdose risk, including safer and riskier behaviors. Specifically, a positive test result may promote more risk reducing behaviors and fewer risk enhancing behaviors than a negative test result. Results suggest that while FTS may promote safer drug use behaviors, outreach and education should emphasize the need for multiple harm reduction techniques in all scenarios.

Evaluating the impact of naloxone dispensation at public health vending machines in Clark County, Nevada

INTRODUCTION

Implementing public health vending machines (PHVMs) is an evidence-based strategy for mitigating substance use-associated morbidity and mortality via the dispensation of essential supplies to people who use drugs, including overdose prevention resources. PHVMs have been implemented throughout the world; however, their implementation in the United States (US) is a recent phenomenon. In 2017, Trac-B Exchange (a syringe services program in Clark County, Nevada) installed three PHVMs. In 2019, naloxone dispensation was launched at PHVMs in Clark County. The purpose of this research is to examine the extent to which naloxone dispensation at PHVMs was associated with changes in opioid-involved overdose fatalities.

METHODS

Monthly counts of opioid-involved overdose fatalities among Clark County residents that occurred from January 2015 to December 2020 were used to build an autoregressive integrated moving averages (ARIMA) model to measure the impact of naloxone dispensation at PHVMs. We forecasted the number of expected opioid-involved overdose fatalities had naloxone dispensation at PHVMs not occurred and compared to observed monthly counts. Interrupted time series analyses (ITSA) were used to evaluate the step (i.e. the immediate impact of naloxone dispensation at PHVMs on opioid-involved overdose fatalities) and slope change (i.e. changes in trend and directionality of monthly counts of opioid-involved overdose fatalities following naloxone dispensation at PHVMs).

RESULTS

During the 12-months immediately following naloxone dispensation at PHVMs, our model forecasted 270 opioid-involved overdose fatalities, but death certificate data indicated only 229 occurred, suggesting an aversion of 41 deaths. ITSA identified a significant negative step change in opioid-involved overdose fatalities at the time naloxone dispensation at PHVMs was launched (B = -8.52, p = .0022) and a significant increasing slope change (B = 1.01, p<.0001). Forecasts that extended into the COVID-19 pandemic suggested worsening trends in overdose fatalities.

CONCLUSION

Naloxone dispensation at PHVMs was associated with immediate reductions in opioid-involved overdose fatalities. Key MessagesNaloxone dispensation at PHVMs was associated with immediate reductions in opioid-involved overdose fatalities.Communities should consider implementing public health vending machines in efforts to prevent opioid-involved overdose fatalities.The COVID-19 pandemic worsened the overdose crisis.

A systematic review of the distribution of take-home naloxone in low- and middle-income countries and barriers to the implementation of take-home naloxone programs

Background

Opioid overdose epidemic is hitting record highs worldwide, accounting for 76% of mortality related to substance use. Take-home naloxone (THN) strategies are being implemented in many developed countries that suffer from high opioid overdose death rates. They aim to provide overdose identification and naloxone administration training, along with THN delivery to opioid users and others likely to witness an overdose incident such as family members and peers. However, little is known about such measures in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), where opioid use and opioid-related deaths are reportedly high. This systematic literature review aims to examine the distribution of THN in LMIC, review studies identifying barriers to the implementation of THN programs worldwide, and assess their applicability to LMIC.

Methods

The literature was searched and analyzed for eligible studies with quality assessment.

Results

Two studies were found from LMIC on THN programs with promising results, and 13 studies were found on the barriers identified in implementing THN programs worldwide. The main barriers to THN strategies were the lack of training of healthcare providers, lack of privileges, time constraints, cost, legislative/policy restrictions, stigma, fear of litigation, and some misperceptions around THN.

Conclusions

The barriers outlined in this paper are probably applicable to LMIC, but more difficult to overcome considering the differences in their response to opioid overdose, their cultural attitudes and norms, the high cost, the waivers required, the legislative differences and the severe penalties for drug-related offenses in some of these countries. The solutions suggested to counter-act these obstacles can also be more difficult to achieve in LMIC. Further research is required in this area with larger sample sizes to provide a better understanding of the obstacles to the implementation, feasibility, accessibility, and utilization of THN programs in LMIC.

Naloxone Co-Dispensing with Opioids: a Cluster Randomized Pragmatic Trial

BACKGROUND

Although naloxone prevents opioid overdose deaths, few patients prescribed opioids receive naloxone, limiting its effectiveness in real-world settings. Barriers to naloxone prescribing include concerns that naloxone could increase risk behavior and limited time to provide necessary patient education.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether pharmacy-based naloxone co-dispensing affected opioid risk behavior. Secondary objectives were to assess if co-dispensing increased naloxone acquisition, increased patient knowledge about naloxone administration, and affected opioid dose and other substance use.

DESIGN

Cluster randomized pragmatic trial of naloxone co-dispensing.

SETTING

Safety-net health system in Denver, Colorado, between 2017 and 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Seven pharmacies were randomized. Pharmacy patients (N=768) receiving opioids were followed using automated data for 10 months. Pharmacy patients were also invited to complete surveys at baseline, 4 months, and 8 months; 325 survey participants were enrolled from November 15, 2017, to January 8, 2019.

INTERVENTION

Intervention pharmacies implemented workflows to co-dispense naloxone while usual care pharmacies provided usual services.

MAIN MEASURES

Survey instruments assessed opioid risk behavior; hazardous drinking; tobacco, cannabis, and other drug use; and knowledge. Naloxone dispensings and opioid dose were evaluated using pharmacy data among pharmacy patients and survey participants. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted using generalized linear mixed models accounting for clustering at the pharmacy level.

KEY RESULTS

Opioid risk behavior did not differ by trial group (P=0.52; 8-month vs. baseline adjusted risk ratio [ARR] 1.07; 95% CI 0.78, 1.47). Compared with usual care pharmacies, naloxone dispensings were higher in intervention pharmacies (ARR 3.38; 95% CI 2.21, 5.15) and participant knowledge increased (P=0.02; 8-month vs. baseline adjusted mean difference 1.05; 95% CI 0.06, 2.04). There was no difference in other substance use by the trial group.

CONCLUSION

Co-dispensing naloxone with opioids effectively increased naloxone receipt and knowledge but did not increase self-reported risk behavior.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ; Identifier: NCT03337100.

A randomized clinical trial of the effects of brief versus extended opioid overdose education on naloxone utilization outcomes by individuals with opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

Overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) trains people who use opioids (PWUO) in how to intervene in cases of opioid overdose but best practices have not been assessed empirically.

METHODS

PWUO along with a significant other (SO) were randomized to one of three training conditions. In the Treatment-as-Usual (TAU) condition, participants were randomized to receive minimal overdose-related education. In the extended training (ET) condition, PWUO received an extended training, while their SO received no overdose training. In the final condition, both the participant and SO received the extended overdose training (ETwSO). Outcome measures were naloxone use and overdose knowledge and competency assessed immediately before and after training, and at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month timepoints following training.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty-one PWUO (w/ a SO) were randomized. All intensities of OD training were associated with sustained increases in OD knowledge/ competency (versus pre-training baseline p's < 0.01). PWUO intervened in 166 ODs. The 12-month incidence of naloxone use did not significantly differ between groups. Extended training (ET + ETwSO) compared to TAU resulted in significantly greater naloxone utilization by: 30 days (10.1% vs 4.1%, p = 0.041), 60 days (16.4% vs 5.2%, p<0.001) and 90 days (17.9% vs 9.5%, p = 0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

All intensities of OD training were associated with sustained increases in OD knowledge and competency, and equivalent rates of successful naloxone use. More extensive training increased naloxone utilization during the first 3 months. However, the benefits of more comprehensive training should be balanced against feasibility.

Beliefs and misperceptions about naloxone and overdose among U.S. laypersons: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) to laypersons are key approaches to reduce the incidence of opioid-involved overdoses. While some research has examined attitudes toward OEND, especially among pharmacists and first responders, our understanding of what laypersons believe about overdose and naloxone is surprisingly limited. Further, some scholars have expressed concerns about the prevalence of non-evidence-based beliefs about overdose and naloxone. We designed this study to analyze the prevalence, nature, and context of beliefs about naloxone and overdose among U.S. laypersons.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study (n = 702) using Prolific.co (representative of the U.S. population by age, gender, and race). Primary outcomes were the believability of six statements about overdose/naloxone on a seven-point Likert-type scale. Five statements were unsupported, and one was supported, by current scientific evidence. We used latent profile analysis to classify participants into belief groups, then used regression to study correlates of profile classification.

RESULTS

Believability of the statements (7: extremely believable) ranged from m = 5.57 (SD = 1.38) for a scientifically supported idea (trained bystanders can reverse overdose with naloxone), to m = 3.33 (SD = 1.83) for a statement claiming opioid users can get high on naloxone. Participants were classified into three latent belief profiles: Profile 1 (most aligned with current evidence; n = 246), Profile 2 (moderately aligned; n = 351), and Profile 3 (least aligned, n = 105). Compared to Profile 1, several covariates were associated with categorization into Profiles 2 and 3, including lower trust in science (RRR = 0.36, 95%CI = 0.24-0.54; RRR = 0.21, 95%CI = 0.12-0.36, respectively), conservative political orientation (RRR = 1.41, 95%CI = 1.23-1.63; 3:RRR = 1.62, 95%CI = 1.35-1.95, respectively), and never being trained about naloxone (Profile 3: RRR = 3.37, 95%CI = 1.16-9.77).

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary evidence suggests some U.S. laypersons simultaneously believe that bystander overdose prevention with naloxone can prevent overdose and one or more scientifically unsupported claims about naloxone/overdose. Categorization into clusters displaying such belief patterns was associated with low trust in science, conservative political orientation, and not having been trained about naloxone.

PREREGISTRATION

This cross-sectional study was preregistered prior to any data collection using the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/c6ufv.

Stigma by Association: To what Extent is the Attitude Toward Naloxone Affected by the Stigma of Opioid Use Disorder?

The United States opioid epidemic is fueled by illicit opioid abuse and prescription opioid misuse and abuse. Consequently, cases of opioid use disorder (OUD, opioid addiction), opioid overdose, and related deaths have increased since the year 2000. Naloxone is an opioid antagonist that rapidly reverses opioid intoxication to prevent death from overdose. It is one of the major risk mitigation strategies recommended in the 2016 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. However, despite the exponential increase in dispensing and distribution of naloxone, opioid overdose and related deaths have continued to increase; suggesting that the increased naloxone supply still lags the need. This discordance is attributed at least in part to the negative attitude toward naloxone, which is based on the belief that naloxone is only meant for "addicts" and "abusers" (OUD patients). This negative attitude or so-called naloxone stigma is therefore considered a major barrier for naloxone distribution and consequently, overdose-death prevention efforts. This article presents evidence that challenges common assertions about OUD stigma being the sole and direct driving force behind naloxone stigma, and the purported magnitude of the barrier that naloxone stigma constitutes for naloxone distribution programs among the stakeholders (patients, pharmacists, and prescribers). The case was then made to operationalize and quantify the construct among the stakeholders to determine the extent to which OUD stigma drives naloxone stigma, and the relative impact of naloxone stigma as a barrier for naloxone distribution efforts.

If we build it, will they come? Perspectives on pharmacy-based naloxone among family and friends of people who use opioids: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Expanding access to the opioid antagonist naloxone to reduce overdose mortality is a public health priority in the United States. Naloxone standing orders (NSOs) have been established in many states to increase naloxone dispensing at pharmacies, but increased pharmacy access does not ensure optimal uptake among those likely to witness an overdose. In a prior statewide purchase trial, we documented high levels of naloxone access at Massachusetts pharmacies under a statewide NSO. In this study, we characterize barriers to pharmacy-based naloxone uptake among potential opioid overdose "bystanders" (friends or family of people who use opioids) that may be amenable to intervention.

METHODS

Eligible bystanders were Massachusetts residents ≥ 18 years of age, did not use illicit opioids in the past 30 days, and knew someone who currently uses illicit opioids. We used a sequential mixed methods approach, in which a series of semi-structured qualitative interviews (N = 22) were conducted April-July 2018, to inform the development of a subsequent quantitative survey (N = 260), conducted February-July 2020.

RESULTS

Most survey participants (77%) reported ever obtaining naloxone but few (21%) attempted to purchase it at a pharmacy. Qualitative participants revealed that barriers to utilizing the NSO included low perceived risk of overdose, which was rooted in misconceptions regarding the risks of prescription opioid misuse, denial about their loved one's drug use, and drug use stereotypes; inaccurate beliefs about the impact of naloxone on riskier opioid use; and concerns regarding anticipated stigma and confidentiality. Many participants had engaged in mutual support groups, which served as a source of free naloxone for half (50%) of those who had ever obtained naloxone.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high levels of pharmacy naloxone access in Massachusetts, few bystanders in our study had attempted to obtain naloxone under the NSO. Low perceived risk of overdose, misinformation, stigma, and confidentiality were important barriers to pharmacy naloxone uptake, all of which are amenable to intervention. Support groups provided a setting for addressing stigma and misinformation and provided a discreet and comfortable setting for naloxone access. Where these groups do not exist and for bystanders who do not participate in such groups, pharmacies are well-positioned to fill gaps in naloxone availability.

Do naloxone access laws affect perceived risk of heroin use? Evidence from national US data

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Whether expanded access to naloxone reduces perceptions of risk about opioid use has been subject to debate. Our aim was to assess how implementation of naloxone access laws shapes perceived risk of heroin use.

DESIGN

Using data from the restricted-access National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Prescription Drug Abuse Policy System and the US Census, we applied two-way fixed-effects models to determine whether naloxone access laws decreased perceived risk of any heroin use or regular heroin use. We used Bayes factors (BFs) to confirm evidence for null findings.

SETTING

United States.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 884 800 respondents aged 12 and older from 2004 to 2016.

MEASUREMENTS

A binary indicator of whether a state implemented naloxone access laws was regressed on respondent-perceived risk of (1) any heroin use and (2) regular heroin use. Ratings of perceived risk were assessed on a scale of 1 (none) to 4 (great risk).

FINDINGS

In all instances, the BFs support evidence for the null hypothesis. Across models with three distinct specifications of naloxone access laws, we found no evidence of decreased risk perceptions, as confirmed by BFs ranging from 0.009 to 0.057. Across models of specific vulnerable subgroups, such as people who use opioids (BFs = 0.039-0.225) or young people (BFs = 0.009-0.158), we found no evidence of decreased risk perceptions. Across diverse subpopulations by gender (BFs = 0.011-0.083), socio-economic status (BFs = 0.015-0.168) or race/ethnicity (BFs = 0.016-0.094), we found no evidence of decreased risk perceptions.

CONCLUSIONS

There appears to be no empirical evidence that implementation of naloxone access laws has adversely affected perceptions of risk of heroin in the broader US population or within vulnerable subgroups or diverse subpopulations.

Effectiveness and implementability of state-level naloxone access policies: Expert consensus from an online modified-Delphi process

BACKGROUND

Naloxone distribution, a key global strategy to prevent fatal opioid overdose, has been a recent target of legislation in the U.S., but there is insufficient empirical evidence from causal inference methods to identify which components of these policies successfully reduce opioid-related harms. This study aimed to examine expert consensus on the effectiveness and implementability of various state-level naloxone policies.

METHODS

We used the online ExpertLens platform to conduct a three-round modified-Delphi process with a purposive sample of 46 key stakeholders (advocates, healthcare providers, human/social service practitioners, policymakers, and researchers) with naloxone policy expertise. The Effectiveness Panel (n = 24) rated average effects of 15 types of policies on naloxone pharmacy distribution, opioid use disorder (OUD) prevalence, nonfatal opioid-related overdoses, and opioid-related overdose mortality. The Implementation Panel (n = 22) rated the same policies on acceptability, feasibility, affordability, and equitability. We compared ratings across policies using medians and inter-percentile ranges, with consensus measured using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Inter-Percentile Range Adjusted for Symmetry technique.

RESULTS

Experts reached consensus on all items. Except for liability protections and required provision of education or training, experts perceived all policies to generate moderate-to-large increases in naloxone pharmacy distribution. However, only three policies were expected to yield substantive decreases on fatal overdose: statewide standing/protocol order, over-the-counter supply, and statewide "free naloxone." Of these, experts rated only statewide standing/protocol orders as highly affordable and equitable, and unlikely to generate meaningful population-level effects on OUD or nonfatal opioid-related overdose. Across all policies, experts rated naloxone prescribing mandates relatively lower in acceptability, feasibility, affordability, and equitability.

CONCLUSION

Experts believe statewide standing/protocol orders are an effective, implementable, and equitable policy for addressing opioid-related overdose mortality. While experts believe many other broad policies are effective in reducing opioid-related harms, they also believe these policies face implementation challenges related to cost and reaching vulnerable populations.

Does naloxone provision lead to increased substance use? A systematic review to assess if there is evidence of a 'moral hazard' associated with naloxone supply

BACKGROUND

Take home naloxone (THN) programs have been rapidly upscaled in response to increasing opioid-related mortality. One often cited concern is that naloxone provision could be associated with increased opioid use, due to the availability of naloxone to reverse opioid overdose. We conducted a systematic review to determine whether THN provision is associated with changes in substance use by participants enrolled in THN programs.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature to assess changes in heroin or other substance use by people who use opioids following THN provision.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 2578 participants were included. Of the seven studies, there were two quasi-experimental studies and five cohort studies. Based on the Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment, four studies were of moderate quality and three studies were of high quality. Of the five studies that reported on the primary outcome of heroin use, no study found evidence of increased heroin use across the study population. Five studies reported on other substance use (benzodiazepines, alcohol, cocaine, amphetamine, cannabis, prescription opioids), none of which found evidence of an increase in other substance use associated with THN provision. Four studies reported on changes in overdose frequency following THN provision: three studies reporting no change, and one study of people prescribed opioids finding a reduction in opioid-related emergency department attendances for participants who received naloxone.

CONCLUSION

We found no evidence that THN provision was associated with increased opioid use or overdose. Concerns that THN supply may lead to increased substance use were not supported by data from reviewed studies.

Bridging institutional logics: Implementing naloxone distribution for people exiting jail in three California counties

Drug overdose is the leading cause of death among formerly incarcerated people. Distribution of the opioid overdose medication naloxone to people who use drugs reduces overdose mortality, and officials in many jurisdictions are now considering or implementing programs to offer naloxone to people exiting jails and prisons. The principles and practices of harm reduction programs such as naloxone distribution conflict with those of penal institutions, raising the question of how organizations based on opposing institutional logics can collaborate on lifesaving programs. Using in-depth interviews and observations conducted over four years with 34 penal, medical, public health, and harm reduction practitioners, we introduce and conceptualize two organizational features to explain why this therapeutic intervention was implemented in local jails in two of three California counties. First, interorganizational bridges between harm reduction, medical, and penal organizations facilitated mutual understanding and ongoing collaboration among administrators and frontline workers in different agencies. Second, respected and influential champions within public health and penal organizations put jail-based naloxone distribution on the local agenda and cultivated support among key officials. Our findings offer guidance for future studies of institutional logics and policy responses to the overdose crisis.

Naloxone's role in the national opioid crisis-past struggles, current efforts, and future opportunities

Over the past 25 years, naloxone has emerged as a critical lifesaving overdose antidote. Public health advocates and community activists established early methods for naloxone distribution to people who inject drugs, but a legacy of stigmatization and opposition to universal naloxone access continues to limit the drug's full potential to reduce opioid-related mortality. The establishment of naloxone distribution programs under the umbrella of syringe exchange programs faces the same practical, ideological and financial barriers to expansion similar to those faced by syringe exchange programs themselves. The expansion of naloxone from the confines of a few syringe exchange programs to what we see today represents an enormous triumph for the grass-roots activists, service providers, and public health professionals who have fought to guarantee lay access to naloxone. Despite the extensive efforts to expand access to naloxone, naloxone continues to remains a scarce resource in many US localities. Considerable naloxone "deserts" remain and even where there is naloxone access, it does not always reach those at risk. Promising areas for expansion include the development of more robust telehealth methods for naloxone distribution, including subsidized mail delivery programs; lowering barriers to pharmacy access; working with hospitals, ambulances, and law enforcement to expand naloxone "leave behind" programs; providing naloxone co-prescription with medications for opioid use disorder; and working with prisons, shelters, and networks of people who use drugs to increase access to the lifesaving medication. Efforts to ensure over-the-counter and low- or no-cost naloxone are ongoing and stand alongside medication-assisted treatments as efficacious, readily-actionable, and cost-efficient population-level interventions available for combatting opioid-related overdose in the United States.

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.

The Increasing Prevalence of Fentanyl: A Urinalysis-Based Study Among Individuals With Opioid Use Disorder in New York City

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Opioid-related overdose deaths in North America have increased drastically, partially due to the increased prevalence of illicitly manufactured fentanyl. The current study sought to assess the prevalence and intentionality of fentanyl use among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD).

METHODS

For this secondary analysis (study 1) we screened a total of 1118 urine samples from 316 participants with OUD from 2016 to 2019. Fentanyl knowledge and intentionality of use were assessed in a separate OUD sample (study 2; N = 33).

RESULTS

In study 1, 34.6% of all urine samples tested positive for fentanyl. Overall, 149 (47.2%) participants provided more than or equal to one urine sample that tested fentanyl-positive, and 93 (29.4%) provided more than or equal to two fentanyl-positive samples. The number of fentanyl-positive samples, relative to the number of samples tested each year, increased by 330% from year 1 to 3. Study 2 found all participants had pre-existing knowledge that drugs may be adulterated with fentanyl, yet 67% were surprised by their own fentanyl-positive test result.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Like previous studies, our data indicate the high prevalence of fentanyl exposure and low perception of fentanyl-related risk among individuals with OUD, respectively, suggesting that opioid overdose harm reduction efforts may need to focus more on drug users' understanding of risks related to fentanyl use and adulteration of drugs.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

The current studies provide longitudinal data on fentanyl exposure prevalence and risk perception that is uniquely granular by assessing OUD treatment status, and by identifying potential associations between fentanyl exposure with the presence of other drug use and nonfatal overdose. (Am J Addict 2021;30:65-71).

Reasons People Who Use Opioids Do Not Accept or Carry No-Cost Naloxone: Qualitative Interview Study

BACKGROUND

Many people use opioids and are at risk of overdose. Naloxone is an opioid antagonist used to counter the effects of opioid overdose. There is an increased availability of naloxone in New York City; however, many who use opioids decline no-cost naloxone even when offered. Others may have the medication but opt not to carry it and report that they would be reluctant to administer it if they were to witness an overdose.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to better understand why people who use opioids may be reluctant to accept, carry, and administer naloxone, and to inform the development of messaging content that addresses barriers to its acceptance and use.

METHODS

We conducted formative qualitative interviews with 20 people who use opioids who are 18 years and older in New York City. Participants were recruited via key informants and chain referral.

RESULTS

Participants cited 4 main barriers that may impede rates of naloxone acceptance, possession, and use: (1) stigma related to substance use, (2) indifference toward overdose, (3) fear of negative consequences of carrying naloxone, and (4) fear of misrecognizing the need for naloxone. Participants also offered suggestions about messaging content to tackle the identified barriers, including messages designed to normalize naloxone possession and use, encourage shared responsibility for community health, and elicit empathy for people who use drugs. Taken together, participants' narratives hold implications for the following potential messaging content: (1) naloxone is short-acting, and withdrawal sickness does not have to be long-lasting; (2) it is critical to accurately identify an opioid-involved overdose; (3) anyone can overdose; (4) naloxone cannot do harm; and (5) the prompt administration of the medication can help ensure that someone can enjoy another day. Finally, participants suggested that messaging should also debunk myths and stereotypes about people who use drugs more generally; people who use opioids who reverse overdoses should be framed as lay public health advocates and not just "others" to be managed with stigmatizing practices and language.

CONCLUSIONS

It must be made a public health priority to get naloxone to people who use opioids who are best positioned to reverse an overdose, and to increase the likelihood that they will carry naloxone and use it when needed. Developing, tailoring, and deploying messages to address stigma, indifference toward overdose, fear and trepidation about reversing an overdose, and fear of police involvement may help alleviate fears among some people who are reluctant to obtain naloxone and use the medication on someone in an overdose situation.

Supervised consumption service use and recent non-fatal overdose among people who inject drugs in Toronto, Canada

BACKGROUND

Aiming to reducing overdose mortality, over 40 supervised drug consumption services (SCS) presently operate in Canada. Arguments against SCS include the potential for increased non-fatal overdoses mediated by risk compensation. This study estimates associations between SCS use and recent non-fatal overdose among people who inject drugs (PWID).

METHODS

We analyzed cross-sectional baseline data collected between November 2018 and March 2020 from a cohort of adult PWID in Toronto, Canada. Recent non-fatal overdose was self-reported over the previous six months. The primary exposure was frequency of SCS use, self-reported as the proportion of injections performed at an SCS (all or most [75-100%], some [26-74%], few [≤25%], or none) in the previous six months. The prevalence of recent overdose was compared between all unique pairs of groups based on their frequency of SCS use and expressed as covariate-adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) estimated using modified Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Among 701 PWID (median [IQR] age, 40 [33 to 49]; 64.3% cisgender men; 56.8% injecting daily), most reported SCS use (all/most, 26.2%; some, 30.9%; few, 29.4%) versus no use (13.5%), with 38.6% reporting a recent overdose. From adjusted regression analyses, more frequent SCS use was not statistically significantly associated with overdose when compared to either no SCS use or less frequent use. Associations between SCS use frequency and overdose were notably smaller among SCS clients compared to associations between SCS clients and non-users (e.g., all/most versus none: PR, 1.43 [95% CI, 0.93 to 2.21]; all/most versus some: PR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.17]; all/most versus few: PR, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.48]).

CONCLUSION

Findings did not indicate statistically significant associations between SCS use frequency and recent non-fatal overdose, particularly among SCS clients who may be more comparable. Nevertheless, overdose was common, underscoring the need to prevent non-fatal overdose and associated morbidity.

"I didn't want to be on Suboxone at first…" - Ambivalence in Perinatal Substance Use Treatment

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this article are to present findings from recent qualitative research with patients in a combined perinatal substance use treatment program in Central Appalachia, and to describe and analyze participants' ambivalence about medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), in the context of widespread societal stigma and judgement.

METHODS

We conducted research in a comprehensive outpatient perinatal substance use treatment program housed in a larger obstetric practice serving a large rural, Central Appalachian region. The program serves patients across the spectrum of substance use disorders but specifically offers medication-assisted treatment to perinatal patients with OUD. We purposively and opportunistically sampled patients receiving prescriptions for buprenorphine or buprenorphine-naloxone dual product, along with prenatal care and other services. Through participant-observation and semi-structured interviews, we gathered qualitative data from 27 participants, in a total of 31 interviews. We analyzed transcripts of interviews and fieldnotes using modified Grounded Theory.

RESULTS

Participants in a combined perinatal substance use treatment program value supportive, non-judgmental care but report ambivalence about medication, within structural and institutional contexts of criminalized, stigmatized substance use and close scrutiny of their pregnancies. Women are keenly aware of the social and public consequences for themselves and their parenting, if they begin or continue medication treatment for OUD.

CONCLUSIONS

Substance use treatment providers should consider the social consequences of medication treatment, as well as the clinical benefits, when presenting treatment options and recommendations to patients. Patient-centered care must include an understanding of larger social and structural contexts.

Opioid overdose reversals using naloxone in New York City by people who use opioids: Implications for public health and overdose harm reduction approaches from a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Adverse reactions to naloxone, such as withdrawal symptoms and aggression, are widely recognised in the literature by pharmaceutical manufacturers and clinical practitioners as standard reactions of individuals who are physically dependent upon opioid drugs following the reversal of potentially fatal opioid overdose. This paper seeks to provide a differentiated view on reactions to naloxone that may have important implications for public health and harm reduction approaches.

METHODS

Analyses from a qualitative investigation embedded within a 5-year Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) examined the risks and benefits of Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) training models (brief or extended training) in various populations of people who use opioids in New York City. The qualitative experiences (obtained through semi-structured interviews) of 46 people who use opioids and who were each involved in the delivery of naloxone, during 56 separate overdose events that occurred throughout 2016-2018, were studied. Situational analysis and inductive content analysis of interview data focused upon overdose reversals in an attempt to provide understandings of the various adverse effects associated with naloxone from their perspective. These analyses were supplemented by data sessions within the research team during which the findings obtained from situational analysis and inductive content analysis were reviewed and complemented by deductive (clinical) appraisals of the various physical and psychological effects associated with the overdose reversals.

RESULTS

People who use opioids recognise three distinct and interconnected outcomes that may follow a successful opioid overdose reversal after intramuscular or intranasal administration of naloxone. These outcomes are here termed, (i) 'rage' (describing a wide range of angry, hostile and/or aggressive outbursts), (ii) 'withdrawal symptoms,' and (iii) 'not rage, not withdrawal' (i.e., a wide range of short-lived, 'harmless' conditions (such as temporary amnesia, mild emotional outbursts, or physical discomfort) that do not include rage or withdrawal symptoms).

CONCLUSION

Physical and psychological reactions to naloxone should not be understood exclusively as a consequence of acute, opioid-related, withdrawal symptoms. The three distinct and interconnected reversal outcomes identified in this study are considered from a harm reduction policy perspective and are further framed by concepts associated with 'mediated toxicity' (i.e., harm triggered by medicine). The overall conclusion is that harm reduction training programmes that are aligned to the policy and practice of take home naloxone may be strengthened by including awareness and training in how to best respond to 'rage' associated with overdose reversal following naloxone administration by people who use opioids and other laypersons.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2017

This paper is the fortieth consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2017 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides and receptors as well as effects of opioid/opiate agonists and antagonists. The review is subdivided into the following specific topics: molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors (1), the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia in animals (2) and humans (3), opioid-sensitive and opioid-insensitive effects of nonopioid analgesics (4), opioid peptide and receptor involvement in tolerance and dependence (5), stress and social status (6), learning and memory (7), eating and drinking (8), drug abuse and alcohol (9), sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (10), mental illness and mood (11), seizures and neurologic disorders (12), electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (13), general activity and locomotion (14), gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (15), cardiovascular responses (16), respiration and thermoregulation (17), and immunological responses (18).

Take-Home Naloxone for the Emergency Interim Management of Opioid Overdose: The Public Health Application of an Emergency Medicine

Naloxone is a well-established essential medicine for the treatment of life-threatening heroin/opioid overdose in emergency medicine. Over two decades, the concept of 'take-home naloxone' has evolved, comprising pre-provision of an emergency supply to laypersons likely to witness an opioid overdose (e.g. peers and family members of people who use opioids as well as non-medical personnel), with the recommendation to administer the naloxone to the overdose victim as interim care while awaiting an ambulance. There is an urgent need for more widespread naloxone access considering the growing problem of opioid overdose deaths, accounting for more than 100,000 deaths worldwide annually. Rises in mortality are particularly sharp in North America, where the ongoing prescription opioid problem is now overlaid with a rapid growth in overdose deaths from heroin and illicit fentanyl. Using opioids alone is dangerous, and the mortality risk is clustered at certain times and contexts, including on prison release and discharge from hospital and residential care. The provision of take-home naloxone has required the introduction of new legislation and new naloxone products. These include pre-filled syringes and auto-injectors and, crucially, new concentrated nasal sprays (four formulations recently approved in different countries) with speed of onset comparable to intramuscular naloxone and relative bioavailability of approximately 40-50%. Choosing the right naloxone dose in the fentanyl era is a matter of ongoing debate, but the safety margin of the approved nasal sprays is superior to improvised nasal kits. New legislation in different countries permits over-the-counter sales or other prescription-free methods of provision. However, access remains uneven with take-home naloxone still not provided in many countries and communities, and with ongoing barriers contributing to implementation inertia. Take-home naloxone is an important component of the response to the global overdose problem, but greater commitment to implementation will be essential, alongside improved affordable products, if a greater impact is to be achieved.

An Analysis of State-Level Policies and Opioid Overdose Deaths

Many legislative and regulatory changes have occurred at the state level in response to the opioid crisis in an attempt to decrease overdose deaths. We conducted a negative binomial, regression-based, interrupted time series analysis to evaluate the effects of policies on opioid overdose death counts for 2008-2017 in five Midwestern states: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, and Ohio. Except for the Good Samaritan laws in Illinois, no single policy change was statistically significant in decreasing overdose deaths. Governmental involvement as a whole was significantly associated with an increase in overdose deaths in Indiana. Policies created to address opioid overdose mortality have had minimal impact in these five Midwestern states. Most of the legislation and regulation that have been created lack educational components for prescribers and community members, which may explain why these policies have not had the intended effect.

"A Blessing and a Curse:" Opioid Users' Perspectives on Naloxone and the Epidemic of Opioid Overdose

Background: To address the alarming rise in opioid overdose deaths, states have increased public access to the overdose reversal medication, naloxone. While some studies suggest that increased naloxone accessibility reduces opioid overdose deaths, others raise concerns about unintended consequences, such as increases in risky drug use and opioid re-use post-overdose to counter naloxone-induced withdrawal symptoms. Few studies have examined the impact of expanded naloxone access on the attitudes and behaviors of opioid users. Methods: In this qualitative study, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 36 English-speaking opioid users 18+ years of age. Informants were recruited from an urban methadone clinic, a needle exchange program and a residential treatment program. The approximately hour-long interviews focused on users' attitudes and behaviors surrounding naloxone, opioid use and overdose. Transcribed audio-recordings of interviews were analyzed using NVivo. Results: Informants were ambivalent about naloxone, widely acknowledging its life-saving benefits while reporting such negative effects as severe withdrawal symptoms and the promotion of riskier drug use. Naloxone-induced withdrawal, coupled with misperceptions about naloxone's pharmacological effects, prompted overdose survivors to rapidly re-use opioids and refuse hospitalization following an overdose reversal. About half the sample believed naloxone led to greater risk-taking by others, such as fentanyl use or use in higher quantities, but did not endorse riskier drug use themselves. Conclusions: The results suggest the need for targeted education about the pharmacological effects of naloxone and better strategies for managing naloxone-induced withdrawal. Future research should focus on the extent to which naloxone is associated with greater opioid risk-taking.

Attitudes and availability: A comparison of naloxone dispensing across chain and independent pharmacies in rural and urban areas in Alabama

BACKGROUND

Fatal opioid overdoses remain the leading cause of accidental deaths in the United States, which have contributed to implementation of standing order laws that allow pharmacists to dispense naloxone to patients. Although pharmacy distribution of naloxone is a promising approach to increase access to this intervention, understanding barriers preventing greater uptake of this service is needed.

METHODS

Data for the current study were collected via telephone survey assessing the availability of various formulations of naloxone at chain and independent pharmacies in rural and urban areas in Birmingham, Alabama (N = 222). Pharmacists' attitudes toward naloxone and potential barriers of pharmacy naloxone distribution were also assessed. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and logistic regression analyses were utilized to examine differences in stocking of naloxone in chain and independent pharmacies and to determine predictors of the number of kits dispensed by pharmacies.

RESULTS

Independent pharmacies were less likely to have naloxone in stock, especially those in rural areas. Furthermore, rural pharmacies required more time to obtain all four formulations of naloxone, and offered less extensive training on naloxone use. Pharmacists endorsing the belief that naloxone allows avoidance of emergent treatment in an overdose situation was associated with fewer dispensed kits by the pharmacies. Over 80% of pharmacists endorsed at least one negative belief about naloxone (e.g., allowing riskier opioid use). Pharmacists noted cost to patients and the pharmacy as contributing to not dispensing more naloxone kits.

CONCLUSION

The current study demonstrates the lower availability of naloxone stocked at pharmacies in independent versus chain pharmacies, particularly in rural communities. This study also highlights several barriers preventing greater naloxone dispensing including pharmacists' attitudes and costs of naloxone. The potential benefit of standing order laws is not being fully actualized due to the structural and attitudinal barriers identified in this study. Strategies to increase naloxone access through pharmacy dispensing are discussed.

Take-home naloxone possession among people who inject drugs in rural West Virginia

BACKGROUND

Take-home naloxone (THN) possession among people who inject drugs (PWID) in rural communities is understudied. Better understanding the nature of THN possession among rural PWID could inform the implementation of overdose prevention initiatives. The purpose of this research is to determine factors associated with rural PWID having recently received THN.

METHODS

Data from a PWID population estimation study implemented in Cabell County, West Virginia were used for this research. Multivariable Poisson regression with a robust variance estimator was used to evaluate the independent effects of several measures (e.g., sociodemographics, structural vulnerabilities, substance use) on PWID having received THN in the past 6 months.

RESULTS

Forty-eight percent of our sample (n = 371) of PWID reported having received THN in the past 6 months. Factors associated with having received THN were: age (adjusted Prevalence Ratio [aPR] = 1.02; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.01-1.03), having recently accessed sterile syringes at a needle exchange program (aPR = 1.82; 95% CI: 1.35-2.46), believing that doctors judge people who use drugs (aPR = 1.50; 95% CI: 1.07-2.12), and having witnessed at least one non-fatal overdose in the past 6 months (aPR = 1.44; 95% CI: 1.06-1.94). Greater numbers of overdose events in the past 6 months were also associated with having received THN.

CONCLUSIONS

Among rural PWID in West Virginia, slightly less than half received THN in the past 6 months. Rural communities need overdose prevention interventions that are responsive to the unique needs of rural PWID, decrease stigma, and ensure PWID have access to harm reduction services and drug treatment programs.

Modelling the combined impact of interventions in averting deaths during a synthetic-opioid overdose epidemic

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The province of British Columbia (BC) Canada has experienced a rapid increase in illicit drug overdoses and deaths during the last 4 years, with a provincial emergency declared in April 2016. These deaths have been driven primarily by the introduction of synthetic opioids into the illicit opioid supply. This study aimed to measure the combined impact of large-scale opioid overdose interventions implemented in BC between April 2016 and December 2017 on the number of deaths averted.

DESIGN

We expanded on the mathematical modelling methodology of our previous study to construct a Bayesian hierarchical latent Markov process model to estimate monthly overdose and overdose-death risk, along with the impact of interventions.

SETTING AND CASES

Overdose events and overdose-related deaths in BC from January 2012 to December 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

The interventions considered were take-home naloxone kits, overdose prevention/supervised consumption sites and opioid agonist therapy MEASUREMENTS: Counterfactual simulations were performed with the fitted model to estimate the number of death events averted for each intervention and in combination.

FINDINGS

Between April 2016 and December 2017, BC observed 2177 overdose deaths (77% fentanyl-detected). During the same period, an estimated 3030 (2900-3240) death events were averted by all interventions combined. In isolation, 1580 (1480-1740) were averted by take-home naloxone, 230 (160-350) by overdose prevention services and 590 (510-720) were averted by opioid agonist therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

A combined intervention approach has been effective in averting overdose deaths during British Columbia's opioid overdose crisis in the period since declaration of a public health emergency (April 2016-December 2017). However, the absolute numbers of overdose deaths have not changed.

Why aren't Australian pharmacists supplying naloxone? Findings from a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose is a significant public health issue among people who use pharmaceutical opioids and/or heroin. One response to reducing overdose deaths is to expand public access to naloxone. The Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration down-scheduled naloxone from prescription only (S4) to pharmacist only over-the-counter (OTC, schedule 3) in February 2016. There is little research examining pharmacists' perspectives or experiences of this change.

METHODS

Thirty-seven semi-structured interviews with Australian community pharmacists were conducted in 2016-2017 to investigate pharmacists' attitudes to and experiences of OTC naloxone. Transcripts were thematically analysed, guided by a broad interest in facilitators and barriers to OTC supply.

RESULTS

Around half of the pharmacists were aware of the down-scheduling and only two had provided OTC naloxone. Core barriers to pharmacist provision of OTC naloxone included limited understanding of opioid overdose, confusion about the role and responsibilities of pharmacists in providing OTC naloxone, concerns about business, stigma related to people who inject drugs (PWID) and system-level challenges.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacy provision of OTC naloxone offers an important opportunity to reduce overdose mortality. Our study suggests this opportunity is yet to be realised and highlights several individual- and structural-level impediments hindering the expansion of public access to naloxone via community pharmacies. There is a need to develop strategies to improve pharmacists' knowledge of OTC naloxone and opioid overdose as well as to address other logistical and cultural barriers that limit naloxone provision in pharmacy settings. These need to be addressed at the individual level (training) as well as the system level (information, regulation and supply).

Evaluation of a fentanyl drug checking service for clients of a supervised injection facility, Vancouver, Canada

BACKGROUND

British Columbia, Canada, is experiencing a public health emergency related to opioid overdoses driven by consumption of street drugs contaminated with illicitly manufactured fentanyl. This cross-sectional study evaluates a drug checking intervention for the clients of a supervised injection facility (SIF) in Vancouver.

METHODS

Insite is a facility offering supervised injection services in Vancouver's Downtown East Side, a community with high levels of injection drug use and associated harms, including overdose deaths. During July 7, 2016, to June 21, 2017, Insite clients were offered an opportunity to check their drugs for fentanyl using a test strip designed to test urine for fentanyl. Results of the drug check were recorded along with information including the substance checked, whether the client intended to dispose of the drug or reduce the dose and whether they experienced an overdose. Logistic regression models were constructed to assess the associations between drug checking results and dose reduction or drug disposal. Crude odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported.

RESULTS

About 1% of the visits to Insite during the study resulted in a drug check. Out of 1411 drug checks conducted by clients, 1121 (79.8%) were positive for fentanyl. Although most tests were conducted post-consumption, following a positive pre-consumption drug check, 36.3% (n = 142) of participants reported planning to reduce their drug dose while only 11.4% (n = 50) planned to dispose of their drug. While the odds of intended dose reduction among those with a positive drug check was significantly higher than those with a negative result (OR = 9.36; 95% CI 4.25-20.65), no association was observed between drug check results and intended drug disposal (OR = 1.60; 95% CI 0.79-3.26). Among all participants, intended dose reduction was associated with significantly lower odds of overdose (OR = 0.41; 95% CI 0.18-0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Although only a small proportion of visits resulted in a drug check, a high proportion (~ 80%) of the drugs checked were contaminated with fentanyl. Drug checking at harm reduction facilities such as SIFs might be a feasible intervention that could contribute to preventing overdoses in the context of the current overdose emergency.

Prescribing naloxone for opioid overdose intervention

To provide an update on prescription of naloxone as a harm-reduction strategy, PubMed was searched to identify publications relevant to naloxone prescribing for reversal of opioid overdose. Opportunities now exist to expand naloxone use, although evidence suggests these are often missed or underexploited. The US FDA has approved an intranasal naloxone spray and an autoinjector naloxone formulation for community use. Effective use of naloxone in community settings requires screening to identify patients at risk of opioid overdose, discussing naloxone use with patients and their relatives, and providing appropriate training. The tools exist to expand the use of naloxone more widely into the community, thereby creating an opportunity to reduce opioid overdose fatalities.

Effects of naloxone distribution to likely bystanders: Results of an agent-based model

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose deaths in the US rose dramatically in the past 16 years, creating an urgent national health crisis with no signs of immediate relief. In 2017, the President of the US officially declared the opioid epidemic to be a national emergency and called for additional resources to respond to the crisis. Distributing naloxone to community laypersons and people at high risk for opioid overdose can prevent overdose death, but optimal distribution methods have not yet been pinpointed.

METHODS

We conducted a sequential exploratory mixed methods design using qualitative data to inform an agent-based model to improve understanding of effective community-based naloxone distribution to laypersons to reverse opioid overdose. The individuals in the model were endowed with cognitive and behavioral variables and accessed naloxone via community sites such as pharmacies, hospitals, and urgent-care centers. We compared overdose deaths over a simulated 6-month period while varying the number of distribution sites (0, 1, and 10) and number of kits given to individuals per visit (1 versus 10). Specifically, we ran thirty simulations for each of thirteen distribution models and report average overdose deaths for each. The baseline comparator was no naloxone distribution. Our simulations explored the effects of distribution through syringe exchange sites with and without secondary distribution, which refers to distribution of naloxone kits by laypersons within their social networks and enables ten additional laypersons to administer naloxone to reverse opioid overdose.

RESULTS

Our baseline model with no naloxone distribution predicted there would be 167.9 deaths in a six month period. A single distribution site, even with 10 kits picked up per visit, decreased overdose deaths by only 8.3% relative to baseline. However, adding secondary distribution through social networks to a single site resulted in 42.5% fewer overdose deaths relative to baseline. That is slightly higher than the 39.9% decrease associated with a tenfold increase in the number of sites, all distributing ten kits but with no secondary distribution. This suggests that, as long as multiple kits are picked up per visit, adding secondary distribution is at least as effective as increasing sites from one to ten. Combining the addition of secondary distribution with an increase in sites from one to ten resulted in a 61.1% drop in deaths relative to the baseline. Adding distribution through a syringe exchange site resulted in a drop of approximately 65% of deaths relative to baseline. In fact, when enabling distribution through a clean-syringe site, the secondary distribution through networks contributed no additional drops in deaths.

CONCLUSION

Community-based naloxone distribution to reverse opioid overdose may significantly reduce deaths. Optimal distribution methods may include secondary distribution so that the person who picks up naloxone kits can enable others in the community to administer naloxone, as well as targeting naloxone distribution to sites where individuals at high-risk for opioid overdose death are likely to visit, such as syringe-exchange programs. This study design, which paired exploratory qualitative data with agent-based modeling, can be used in other settings seeking to implement and improve naloxone distribution programs.

Dispensing Naloxone Without a Prescription: Survey Evaluation of Ohio Pharmacists

Background:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports a 200% escalation in the rate of opioid overdose deaths in the United States. Unfortunately, Ohio has been deemed the epicenter of the nation’s opioid epidemic. In 2015, Ohio passed a bill that permits a pharmacist to distribute naloxone without a prescription.

Objectives:

This survey was aimed to discover pharmacists’ knowledge of naloxone and Ohio law, perceived barriers that may prohibit naloxone dispensing, and Ohio pharmacists’ general confidence, comfort, perception, and experience dispensing naloxone per physician protocol.

Methods:

Pharmacists’ knowledge of naloxone and Ohio law pertaining to dispensing naloxone; perceived barriers to naloxone distribution; and overall experience, willingness, comfort, and perceptions of personally supplying naloxone were assessed using multiple-choice and Likert-type scale questions through an e-mail survey.

Results:

Overall, Ohio pharmacists were knowledgeable about naloxone and displayed confidence in their training and ability to provide patient education on naloxone. Pharmacists were less certain about Ohio law pertaining to naloxone distribution, especially those who have been in practice longer. Pharmacists indicated several barriers to dispensing naloxone and the need for more training. Younger pharmacists were more likely to report a concern with clientele who would frequent their pharmacy and moral and ethical concerns as barriers to dispensing naloxone.

Conclusion:

Additional educational programs should be delivered to Ohio pharmacists to inform them of the state law and policies. Continuing education programs that review substance abuse and attempt to reduce social stigma may assist with increasing naloxone distribution to those in need, especially, if directed toward younger pharmacists in Ohio.