A systematic review of opioid overdose interventions delivered within emergency departments

Effect of a peer-led emergency department behavioral intervention on non-fatal opioid overdose: 18-month outcome in the Navigator randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Emergency departments (EDs) provide an opportunity to identify people at risk of overdose and reduce the risk. We evaluated the effect of an ED behavioral intervention delivered by peer recovery support specialists (PRSSs) on non-fatal opioid overdose.

DESIGN

Two-arm, randomized trial.

SETTING

Two EDs in Rhode Island, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

ED patients presenting with an opioid overdose, complications of opioid use disorder or a recent history of opioid overdose (November 2018-May 2021). Among 648 participants, the mean age was 36.9 years, 68.2% were male and 68.5% were White.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Participants were randomized to receive a behavioral intervention from a PRSS (n = 323) or a licensed clinical social worker (LICSW) (n = 325). PRSS and LICSW used evidence-based interviewing and intervention techniques, informed by their lived experience (PRSS) or clinical theory and practice (LICSW).

MEASUREMENTS

We identified non-fatal opioid overdoses in the 18 months following the ED visit through linkage to statewide emergency medical services data using a validated case definition. The primary outcome was any non-fatal opioid overdose during the 18-month follow-up period.

FINDINGS

Among 323 participants randomized to the PRSS arm, 81 (25.1%) had a non-fatal opioid overdose during follow-up, compared with 95 (29.2%) of 325 participants randomized to the LICSW arm (P = 0.24). There was no statistically significant difference in the effectiveness of randomization to the PRSS arm versus the LICSW arm on the risk of non-fatal opioid overdose, adjusting for the history of previous overdose (relative risk = 0.86, 95% confidence interval = 0.67-1.11).

CONCLUSIONS

In Rhode Island, USA, over one-in-four emergency department patients at high risk of overdose experience a non-fatal opioid overdose in the 18 months post-discharge. We found no evidence that the risk of non-fatal opioid overdose differs for emergency department patients receiving a behavioral intervention from a peer recovery support specialist versus a licensed clinical social worker.

Results From the POINT Pragmatic Randomized Trial: An Emergency Department-Based Peer Support Specialist Intervention to Increase Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Linkage and Reduce Recurrent Overdose

BACKGROUND

People with opioid use disorder (OUD) frequently present at the emergency department (ED), a potentially critical point for intervention and treatment linkage. Peer recovery support specialist (PRSS) interventions have expanded in US-based EDs, although evidence supporting such interventions has not been firmly established.

METHODS

Researchers conducted a pragmatic trial of POINT (Project Planned Outreach, Intervention, Naloxone, and Treatment), an ED-initiated intervention for harm reduction and recovery coaching/treatment linkage in 2 Indiana EDs. Cluster randomization allocated patients to the POINT intervention (n = 157) versus a control condition (n = 86). Participants completed a structured interview, and all outcomes were assessed using administrative data from an extensive state health exchange and state systems. Target patients (n = 243) presented to the ED for a possible opioid-related reason. The primary outcome was overdose-related ED re-presentation. Key secondary outcomes included OUD medication treatment linkage, duration of medication in days, all-cause ED re-presentation, all-cause inpatient re-presentation, and Medicaid enrollment. All outcomes were assessed at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-enrollment. Ad hoc analyses were performed to assess treatment motivation and readiness.

RESULTS

POINT and standard care participants did not differ significantly on any outcomes measured. Participants who presented to the ED for overdose had significantly lower scores (3.5 vs 4.2, P < .01) regarding readiness to begin treatment compared to those presenting for other opioid-related issues.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first randomized trial investigating overdose outcomes for an ED peer recovery support specialist intervention. Though underpowered, results suggest no benefit of PRSS services over standard care. Given the scope of PRSS, future work in this area should assess more recovery- and harm reduction-oriented outcomes, as well as the potential benefits of integrating PRSS within multimodal ED-based interventions for OUD.

Trends in recurrent overdose and treatment initiation following emergency department visits for opioid overdose between 2016 and 2021

BACKGROUND

Overdose remains a pressing public health concern in the United States, particularly with the emergence of fentanyl and other potent synthetic opioids in the drug supply. We evaluated trends in recurrent overdose and opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment initiation following emergency department (ED) visits for opioid overdose to inform response efforts.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used electronic health record and statewide administrative data from Rhode Island residents who visited EDs for opioid overdose between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2021, a period with fentanyl predominance in the local drug supply. The primary outcome was recurrent overdose in the 365 days following the initial ED visit. OUD treatment initiation within 180 days following the initial ED visit was considered as a secondary outcome. Trends in study outcomes were summarized by year of the initial ED visit.

RESULTS

Among 1745 patients attending EDs for opioid overdose, 20 % (n=352) experienced a recurrent overdose within 365 days, and this percentage was similar by year (p=0.12). Among patients who experienced any recurrent overdose, the median time to first recurrent overdose was 88 days (interquartile range=23-208), with 85 % (n=299/352) being non-fatal. Among patients not engaged in OUD treatment at their initial ED visit, 33 % (n=448/1370) initiated treatment within 180 days; this was similar by year (p=0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Following ED visits for opioid overdose in Rhode Island from 2016-2021, the one-year risk of recurrent overdose and six-month treatment initiation rate remained stable over time. Innovative prevention strategies and improved treatment access are needed.

Warning Labels as a Public Health Intervention: Effects and Challenges for Tobacco, Cannabis, and Opioid Medications

Warning labels help consumers understand product risks, enabling informed decisions. Since the 1966 introduction of cigarette warning labels in the United States, research has determined the most effective message content (health effects information) and format (brand-free packaging with pictures). However, new challenges have emerged. This article reviews the current state of tobacco warning labels in the United States, where legal battles have stalled pictorial cigarette warnings and new products such as electronic cigarettes and synthetic nicotine products pose unknown health risks. This article describes the emerging research on cannabis warnings; as more places legalize recreational cannabis, they are adopting lessons from tobacco warnings. However, its uncertain legal status and widespread underestimation of harms impede strict warning standards. The article also reviews opioid medication warning labels, suggesting that lessons from tobacco could help in the development of effective and culturally appropriate FDA-compliant opioid warning labels that promote safe medication use and increased co-dispensing of naloxone.

Is a randomised controlled trial of take home naloxone distributed in emergency settings likely to be feasible and acceptable? Findings from a UK qualitative study exploring perspectives of people who use opioids and emergency services staff

OBJECTIVE

Distribution of take-home naloxone (THN) by emergency services may increase access to THN and reduce deaths and morbidity from opioid overdose. As part of a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of distribution of THN kits and education within ambulance services and Emergency Departments (EDs), we used qualitative methods to explore key stakeholders' perceptions of feasibility and acceptability of delivering the trial.

METHODS

We undertook semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 26 people who use opioids and with 20 paramedics and ED staff from two intervention sites between 2019 and 2021. Interviews and focus groups were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis.

RESULTS

People using opioids reported high awareness of overdose management, including personal experience of THN use. Staff perceived emergency service provision of THN as a low-cost, low-risk intervention with potential to reduce mortality, morbidity and health service use. Staff understood the trial aims and considered it compatible with their work. All participants supported widening access to THN but reported limited trial recruitment opportunities partly due to difficulties in consenting patients during overdose. Procedural problems, restrictive recruitment protocols, limited staff buy-in and patients already owning THN limited trial recruitment. Determining trial effectiveness was challenging due to high levels of alternative community provision of THN.

CONCLUSIONS

Distribution of THN in emergency settings was considered feasible and acceptable for stakeholders but an RCT to establish the effectiveness of THN delivery is unlikely to generate further useful evidence due to difficulties in recruiting patients and assessing benefits.

Association between comorbid chronic pain or prior hospitalization for mental illness and substance use treatment among a cohort at high risk of opioid overdose

INTRODUCTION

Chronic pain and serious mental illness increase risk of opioid use, and opioid use can exacerbate both conditions. Substance use disorder (SUD) treatment can be lifesaving, but chronic pain and serious mental illness may make recovery challenging. We evaluated the association between current chronic pain and prior hospitalization for mental illness and 90-day SUD treatment engagement, among emergency department (ED) patients at high risk of opioid overdose.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort analysis of 648 ED patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial in Rhode Island. We linked baseline study data on chronic pain and prior hospitalization for mental illness to statewide administrative data on state-licensed treatment programs (including methadone) and buprenorphine treatment via prescription. We defined treatment engagement as initiation of a state-licensed treatment program, transfer between state-licensed programs/providers, or a buprenorphine prescription (re-)fill. We used modified Poisson models to estimate the association between each baseline comorbidity and treatment engagement within 90 days following the ED visit, adjusted for a priori potential confounders. In an exploratory analysis, models were stratified by baseline treatment status.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 37 years; 439 (68 %) were male, and 446 (69 %) had been recently unhoused. Overall, 278 participants (43 %) engaged in treatment within 90 days of the ED visit. Participants with prior hospitalization for mental illness were more likely to engage in treatment than those without (adjusted risk ratio [ARR] = 1.24, 95 % confidence interval [CI] = 1.01-1.53), although this association was only among those already accessing treatment at baseline (ARR = 1.58, 95 % CI = 1.10-2.27). Chronic pain was not associated with 90-day treatment engagement overall (ARR = 1.12, 95 % CI = 0.91-1.38) or within baseline treatment subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among ED patients at high risk of opioid overdose and accessing treatment at baseline, those with prior hospitalization for mental illness (but not chronic pain) were more likely to engage in treatment following the ED visit, which may reflect disproportionate initiation of additional treatment programs, transfer between programs/providers, or ongoing buprenorphine treatment. Touchpoints within the medical system should be leveraged to ensure that everyone, including those with serious mental illness, can access high-quality SUD treatment at the desired intensity level.

Understanding Healthcare Providers' Care for Patients with Medications Treating Opioid Use Disorder in the Emergency Department: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

There is limited research exploring the changing clinical practices among healthcare providers (HPs) care for patients with Emergency Department (ED)-initiated Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD).

METHODS

This scoping review followed the methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley to map relevant evidence and synthesize the findings. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus for related studies from inception through October 12, 2022. Following the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 16 studies were included. Subsequently, they were charted and analyzed thematically based on ecological systems theory.

RESULTS

The main determinants in the four ecological systems were generated as follows: (1) microsystem: willingness and attitude, professional competence, readiness, and preference; (2) mesosystem: ED clinical practices, departmental factors; (3) exosystem: multidisciplinary approaches, discharge planning, and (4) macrosystem: stigma, health insurance, policy. The findings have implications for HPs and researchers, as insufficient adoption, implementation, and retention of MOUD in the ED affect clinical practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Across the four ecological systems, ED-initiated MOUD is shaped by multifaceted determinants. The microsystem underscores pivotal patient-HP trust dynamics, while the mesosystem emphasizes interdepartmental synergies. Exosystemically, resource allocation and standardized training remain paramount. The macrosystem reveals profound effects of stigma, insurance disparities, and evolving policies on treatment access and efficacy. Addressing these interconnected barriers is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes in the context of MOUD.

What makes a peer? Characteristics of certified peer recovery support specialists in an emergency department-based intervention

Providing brief interventions by certified peer recovery support specialists (CPRSS) in the emergency department (ED) following a drug related visit is a promising method of service engagement and has garnered national attention. This study examines CPRSS's perceptions of the qualities that enable them to deliver interventions in the ED. We conducted qualitative interviews with 14 CPRSSs working in EDs. Interview topics included how the participants became involved with CPRSS work, experiences working in the ED, how the ED differs from other settings, and what interactions with patients look like. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for emerging categories. Three categories were identified relating to CPRSS work: (1) how they approach peer work, (2) inherent qualities required to do the work, regardless of the setting, and (3) context-specific skills required to do the work in the ED. When describing their approach to this work, participants talked about CPRSS work as their life calling and their passion. Participants also identified certain qualities that all CPRSS workers possess, regardless of the setting, including the ability to build rapport, strong listening skills, and a shared lived experience. Lastly, participants identified how specific hard and soft skills help them to navigate organizational and structural challenges in the ED. The unique conditions of the ED and the required qualities of a CPRSS should be considered when implementing an ED-based intervention.

Strategies to support substance use disorder care transitions from acute-care to community-based settings: a scoping review and typology

BACKGROUND

Acute-care interventions that identify patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), initiate treatment, and link patients to community-based services, have proliferated in recent years. Yet, much is unknown about the specific strategies being used to support continuity of care from emergency department (ED) or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD treatment. In this scoping review, we synthesize the existing literature on patient transition interventions, and form an initial typology of reported strategies.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO for peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2021 that studied interventions linking patients with SUD from ED or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD services. Eligible articles measured at least one post-discharge treatment outcome and included a description of the strategy used to promote linkage to community care. Detailed information was extracted on the components of the transition strategies and a thematic coding process was used to categorize strategies into a typology based on shared characteristics. Facilitators and barriers to transitions of care were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Forty-five articles met inclusion criteria. 62% included ED interventions and 44% inpatient interventions. The majority focused on patients with opioid (71%) or alcohol (31%) use disorder. The transition strategies reported across studies were heterogeneous and often not well described. An initial typology of ten transition strategies, including five pre- and five post-discharge transition strategies is proposed. The most common strategy was scheduling an appointment with a community-based treatment provider prior to discharge. A range of facilitators and barriers were described, which can inform efforts to improve hospital-to-community transitions of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to support transitions from acute-care to community-based SUD services, although critical for ensuring continuity of care, vary greatly across interventions and are inconsistently measured and described. More research is needed to classify SUD care transition strategies, understand their components, and explore which lead to the best patient outcomes.

Perspectives and recommendations of opioid overdose survivors experiencing unsheltered homelessness on housing, overdose, and substance use treatment in Boston, MA

INTRODUCTION

Opioid overdose causes one in four deaths among people experiencing homelessness in Boston, MA. To reduce overdose risks, the experience and perspectives of people experiencing homelessness should be incorporated into housing, overdose prevention, and substance use treatment efforts.

METHODS

In 2021, we conducted qualitative interviews with 59 opioid overdose survivors to inform equitable access to treatment services. In response to policy debate surrounding a public drug scene near a key recruitment site, we conducted a targeted thematic analysis of transcribed interview data from a subset of participants experiencing unsheltered homelessness (n=29) to explore their perspectives and recommendations on housing, overdose prevention, and substance use treatment.

RESULTS

Among 29 participants who identified as non-Hispanic Black (n=10), Hispanic/Latinx (n=10), or as non-Hispanic White (n=9), the median number of self-reported opioid overdoses in the past three months was 2.0 (SD 3.7). Three themes emerged from this targeted analysis: (1) Participants described inadequate housing resources and unwelcoming shelter environments. (2) Participants near a large public drug scene explained how unsheltered homelessness was chaotic, dangerous, and disruptive to recovery goals. (3) Participants provided recommendations for improving housing and addiction treatment systems and including their perspectives in the development of solutions to the intersecting housing and opioid overdose crises.

CONCLUSIONS

The overdose prevention, housing and substance use treatment systems must address the needs of opioid overdose survivors experiencing unsheltered homelessness. Overdose survivors experiencing unsheltered homelessness described a chaotic public drug scene but resorted to residing in nearby encampments because the existing shelter, housing, and addiction treatment systems were unwelcoming, difficult to navigate, or unaffordable. Despite efforts to provide low-threshold housing in Boston, additional low-barrier housing services (i.e., including harm reduction resources and without "sobriety" requirements) could promote the health and safety of people who use drugs and are experiencing homelessness.

Strategies to support substance use disorder care transitions from acute-care to community-based settings: A Scoping review and typology

Background

Acute-care interventions that identify patients with substance use disorders (SUDs), initiate treatment, and link patients to community-based services, have proliferated in recent years. Yet, much is unknown about the specific strategies being used to support continuity of care from emergency department (ED) or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD treatment. In this scoping review, we synthesize the existing literature on patient transition interventions, and form an initial typology of reported strategies.

Methods

We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO for peer-reviewed articles published between 2000-2021 that studied interventions linking SUD patients from ED or inpatient hospital settings to community-based SUD services. Eligible articles measured at least one post-discharge treatment outcome and included a description of the strategy used to promote linkage to community care. Detailed information was extracted on the components of the transition strategies and a thematic coding process was used to categorize strategies into a typology based on shared characteristics. Facilitators and barriers to transitions of care were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

Results

Forty-five articles met inclusion criteria. 62% included ED interventions and 44% inpatient interventions. The majority focused on patients with opioid (71%) followed by alcohol (31%) use disorder. The transition strategies reported across studies were heterogeneous and often not well described. An initial typology of ten transition strategies, including five pre- and five post-discharge transition strategies is proposed. The most common strategy was scheduling an appointment with a community-based treatment provider prior to discharge. A range of facilitators and barriers were described, which can inform efforts to improve hospital-to-community transitions of care.

Conclusions

Strategies to support transitions from acute-care to community-based SUD services, although critical for ensuring continuity of care, vary greatly across interventions and are inconsistently measured and described. More research is needed to classify SUD care transition strategies, understand their components, and explore which lead to the best patient outcomes.

Alcohol and other drug use: A qualitative exploration of staff and patient's experiences of language use as a means of stigma communication in hospital and primary care settings

INTRODUCTION

The hospital and primary care settings present opportunities to interact, initiate conversations, and instigate referrals for patients experiencing harm from their alcohol and other drug use. Using a stigma communication model, our qualitative study explored whether stigma communication materialized in staff's language in the hospital and primary care settings, and if so, whether this had any impact on staff's and patients' experiences.

METHOD

The study conducted thematic analysis on 39 semi-structured interviews comprising both male and female adults (n = 20) who had experienced or were currently experiencing problematic alcohol or other drug use; and staff (n = 19) from either alcohol and other drug specialist services, or other broader health care services.

RESULTS

The study identified three themes where language use materialized as a means of stigma communication: (i) language that positioned a patient as undeserving; (ii) language that separated a patient from other patients; and (iii) language that blamed a patient. Where language use materialized as a means of stigma communication, this appeared to influence staff's decision-making, or potential avoidance of staff's obligations related to health care. Where language use materialized as a means of stigma communication for patients, poor experiences occurred for both staff and patients, that potentially influenced health care provision and future treatment-seeking intentions.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of language as a means of stigma communication was present in staff/patient interactions. Although a number of targeted interventions exist that address language and stigma toward people who use alcohol and other drugs, our findings indicate that change may be inhibited if staff do not realize that their own use of language may contribute to the perpetuation of stigma. The findings also suggest that aspects of language that materialize as a means of stigma communication may impact the "no wrong door" approach, which intends that people, regardless of which service they attend, receive appropriate support.

Experiences of patients at high risk of opioid overdose accessing emergency department and behavioral health interventions: a qualitative analysis in an urban emergency department

BACKGROUND

Emergency Departments (EDs) have become critical 'touchpoints' for the identification and early engagement of patients at risk of overdose or who have an opioid use disorder (OUD). Our objectives were to examine patients' ED experiences, identify barriers and facilitators of service uptake in ED settings, and explore patients' experiences with ED staff.

METHODS

This qualitative study was part of a randomized controlled trial that evaluated the effectiveness of clinical social workers and certified peer recovery specialists in increasing treatment uptake and reducing opioid overdose rates for people with OUD. Between September 2019 and March 2020, semi-structured interviews were conducted 19 participants from the trial. Interviews sought to assess participants' ED care experiences across intervention type (i.e., clinical social worker or peer recovery specialist). Participants were purposively sampled across intervention arm (social work, n = 11; peer recovery specialist, n = 7; control, n = 1). Data were analyzed thematically with a focus on participant experiences in the ED and social and structural factors shaping care experiences and service utilization.

RESULTS

Participants reported varied ED experiences, including instances of discrimination and stigma due to their substance use. However, participants underscored the need for increased engagement of people with lived experience in ED settings, including the use of peer recovery specialists. Participants highlighted that ED provider interactions were critical drivers of shaping care and service utilization and needed to be improved across EDs to improve post-overdose care.

CONCLUSIONS

While the ED provides an opportunity to reach patients at risk of overdose, our results demonstrate how ED-based interactions and service provision can impact ED care engagement and service utilization. Modifications to care delivery may improve experiences for patients with OUD or at high risk for overdose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration: NCT03684681.

The acceptability of overdose alert and response technologies: introducing the TPOM-ODART framework

Background

Opioids were implicated in approximately 88,000 fatal overdoses (OD) globally. However, in principle all opioid OD are reversible with the timely administration of naloxone hydrochloride. Despite the widespread availability of naloxone among people who use opioids (PWUO), many who suffer fatal OD use alone, without others present to administer the reversal agent. Recognising this key aspect of the challenge calls for innovations, a number of technological approaches have emerged which aim to connect OD victims with naloxone. However, the acceptability of OD response technologies to PWUO is of key concern.

Methods

Drawing on the Technology People Organisations Macroenvironment (TPOM) framework, this study sought to integrate acceptability-related findings in this space with primary research data from PWUO, affected family members and service providers to understand the factors involved in harm reduction technology acceptability.

A qualitative study using a focus group methodology was conducted. The participant groups were people with lived experience of problem opioid use, affected family members and service providers. Data analysis followed a multi-stage approach to thematic analysis and utilised both inductive and deductive methods.

Results

Thirty individuals participated in one of six focus groups between November 2021 and September 2022. The analysis generated six major themes, three of which are reported in this article—selected for their close relevance to PWUO and their importance to developers of digital technologies for this group. ‘Trust—in technologies, systems and people’ was a major theme and was closely linked to data security, privacy and confidentiality. ‘Balancing harm reduction, safety and ambivalence’ reflects the delicate balance technological solutions must achieve to be acceptable to PWUO. Lastly, ‘readiness—a double bind’ encapsulates the perception shared across participant groups, that those at the highest risk, may be the least able to engage with interventions.

Conclusion

Effective digital strategies to prevent fatal OD must be sensitive to the complex relationships between technological, social/human, organisational and wider macroenvironmental factors which can enable or impede intervention delivery. Trust, readiness and performance are central to technology acceptability for PWUO. An augmented TPOM was developed (the TPOM-ODART).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12954-023-00763-4.

Risk of Experiencing an Overdose Event for Patients Undergoing Treatment With Medication for Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Overdose risk during a course of treatment with medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has not been clearly delineated. The authors sought to address this gap by leveraging a new data set from three large pragmatic clinical trials of MOUD.

METHODS

Adverse event logs, including overdose events, from the three trials (N=2,199) were harmonized, and the overall risk of having an overdose event in the 24 weeks after randomization was compared for each study arm (one methadone, one naltrexone, and three buprenorphine groups), using survival analysis with time-dependent Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

By week 24, 39 participants had ≥1 overdose event. The observed frequency of having an overdose event was 15 (5.30%) among 283 patients assigned to naltrexone, eight (1.51%) among 529 patients assigned to methadone, and 16 (1.15%) among 1,387 patients assigned to buprenorphine. Notably, 27.9% of patients assigned to extended-release naltrexone never initiated the medication, and their overdose rate was 8.9% (7/79), compared with 3.9% (8/204) among those who initiated naltrexone. Controlling for sociodemographic and time-varying medication adherence variables and baseline substance use, a proportional hazard model did not show a significant effect of naltrexone assignment. Significantly higher probabilities of experiencing an overdose event were observed among patients with baseline benzodiazepine use (hazard ratio=3.36, 95% CI=1.76, 6.42) and those who either were never inducted on their assigned study medication (hazard ratio=6.64, 95% CI=2.12, 19.54) or stopped their medication after initial induction (hazard ratio=4.04, 95% CI=1.54, 10.65).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with opioid use disorder seeking medication treatment, the risk of overdose events over the next 24 weeks is elevated among those who fail to initiate or discontinue medication and those who report benzodiazepine use at baseline.

Rapid induction onto extended-release injectable buprenorphine following opioid overdose: A case series

Background

Buprenorphine treatment has been associated with reduced non-prescribed opioid use and opioid related overdose (OD). We evaluated initial outcomes of rapid induction onto extended-release injectable buprenorphine (BUP-XR) within 7 days of emergency department presentation for unintentional OD.

Methods

Between February 2019-February 2021, N = 19 patients with opioid use disorder received buprenorphine/naloxone (4/1 mg), followed by BUP-XR (300 mg) at induction and continued BUP-XR outpatient for 6 months. Primary outcomes included adverse events, repeat OD, and death.

Results

For patients who received at least one dose of BUP-XR, there were no treatment related serious adverse events or symptoms of precipitated withdrawal. In addition, there were no repeat visits for ODs or deaths within 6 months of the initial OD.

Discussion

These preliminary findings support the need for larger controlled clinical trials to examine the safety and efficacy of rapid induction of BUP-XR in patients with opioid use disorder at high risk of opioid OD. Rapid induction onto long-lasting injectable buprenorphine may be a promising and protective treatment approach in the future.

Overdose Alert and Response Technologies: State-of-the-art Review

BACKGROUND

Drug overdose deaths, particularly from opioids, are a major global burden, with 128,000 deaths estimated in 2019. Opioid overdoses can be reversed through the timely administration of naloxone but only if responders are able to administer it. There is an emerging body of research and development in technologies that can detect the early signs of an overdose and facilitate timely responses.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to identify and classify overdose-specific digital technologies being developed, implemented, and evaluated.

METHODS

We conducted a "state-of-the-art review." A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, ACM, IEEE Xplore, and SciELO. We also searched references from articles and scanned the gray literature. The search included terms related to telehealth and digital technologies, drugs, and overdose and papers published since 2010. We classified our findings by type of technology and its function, year of publication, country of study, study design, and theme. We performed a thematic analysis to classify the papers according to the main subject.

RESULTS

Included in the selection were 17 original research papers, 2 proof-of-concept studies, 4 reviews, 3 US government grant registries, and 6 commercial devices that had not been named in peer-reviewed literature. All articles were published between 2017 and 2022, with a marked increase since 2019. All were based in or referred to the United States or Canada and concerned opioid overdose. In total, 39% (9/23) of the papers either evaluated or described devices designed to monitor vital signs and prompt an alert once a certain threshold indicating a potential overdose has been reached. A total of 43% (10/23) of the papers focused on technologies to alert potential responders to overdoses and facilitate response. In total, 48% (11/23) of the papers and 67% (4/6) of the commercial devices described combined alert and response devices. Sensors monitor a range of vital signs, such as oxygen saturation level, respiratory rate, or movement. Response devices are mostly smartphone apps enabling responders to arrive earlier to an overdose site. Closed-loop devices that can detect an overdose through a sensor and automatically administer naloxone without any external intervention are still in the experimental or proof-of-concept phase. The studies were grouped into 4 themes: acceptability (7/23, 30%), efficacy or effectiveness (5/23, 22%), device use and decision-making (3/23, 13%), and description of devices (6/23, 26%).

CONCLUSIONS

There has been increasing interest in the research and application of these technologies in recent years. Literature suggests willingness to use these devices by people who use drugs and affected communities. More real-life studies are needed to test the effectiveness of these technologies to adapt them to the different settings and populations that might benefit from them.

Differences in overdose deaths by intent: Unintentional & suicide drug poisonings in North Carolina, 2015-2019

Comprehensive fatal overdose prevention requires an understanding of the fundamental causes and context surrounding drug overdose. Using a social determinants of health (SDOH) framework, this descriptive study examined unintentional and self-inflicted (i.e., suicide) overdose deaths in North Carolina (NC), focusing on specific drug involvement and contextual factors. Unintentional and suicide overdose deaths were identified using 2015-2019 NC death certificate data. Specific drug involvement was assessed by searching literal text fields for drug mentions. County-level contextual factors were obtained from NC Institute of Medicine and County Health Rankings, encompassing five SDOH domains (economic stability, social/community context, health care access/quality, education access/quality, neighborhood/built environment). Descriptive statistics were calculated by intent for drug involvement and a variety of contextual factors. During 2015-2019, 9% of NC drug overdose deaths were self-inflicted and 89% were unintentional (2% other/undetermined). Unintentional overdoses largely involved illicit drugs [fentanyl (47%), cocaine (33%), heroin (29%)]. Suicide overdoses frequently involved prescription opioids [oxycodone (18%), hydrocodone (10%)] and antidepressants (32%). Overall, overdose deaths tended to occur in under-resourced counties across all SDOH domains, though unintentional overdoses occurred more often among residents of under-resourced counties than suicide overdoses, with differences most pronounced for economic stability-related factors. There are notable distinctions between unintentional and suicide overdose deaths in demographics and drug involvement, though the assessment of SDOH demonstrated that overdose mortality is broadly associated with marginalization across all domains. These findings highlight the value of allocating resources to prevention and intervention approaches that target upstream causes of overdose (e.g., housing first, violence prevention programs).

Patient perspectives on naloxone receipt in the emergency department: a qualitative exploration

Background

Emergency departments (EDs) are important venues for the distribution of naloxone to patients at high risk of opioid overdose, but less is known about patient perceptions on naloxone or best practices for patient education and communication. Our aim was to conduct an in-depth exploration of knowledge and attitudes toward ED naloxone distribution among patients who received a naloxone prescription.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 25 adult participants seen and discharged from three urban, academic EDs in Philadelphia, PA, with a naloxone prescription between November 2020 and February 2021. Interviews focused on awareness of naloxone as well as attitudes and experiences receiving naloxone in the ED. We used thematic content analysis to identify key themes reflecting patient attitudes and experiences.

Results

Of the 25 participants, 72% had previously witnessed an overdose and 48% had personally experienced a non-fatal overdose. Nineteen participants (76%) self-disclosed a history of substance use or overdose, and one reported receiving an opioid prescription during their ED visit and no history of substance use. In interviews, we identified wide variability in participant levels of knowledge about overdose risk, the role of naloxone in reducing risk, and naloxone access. A subset of participants was highly engaged with community harm reduction resources and well versed in naloxone access and use. A second subset was familiar with naloxone, but largely obtained it through healthcare settings such as the ED, while a final group was largely unfamiliar with naloxone. While most participants expressed positive attitudes about receiving naloxone from the ED, the quality of discussions with ED providers was variable, with some participants not even aware they were receiving a naloxone prescription until discharge.

Conclusions

Naloxone prescribing in the ED was acceptable and valued by most participants, but there are missed opportunities for communication and education. These findings underscore the critical role that EDs play in mitigating risks for patients who are not engaged with other healthcare or community health providers and can inform future work about the effective implementation of harm reduction strategies in ED settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12954-022-00677-7.

Opioid Literacy Among African Americans Living in Rural Alabama: Findings From a Social Determinants of Health (SDH) Framework

Limited research examining opioid literacy among African Americans (AAs) have been conducted. The current study examined the association between opioid literacy levels among AAs in rural Alabama using the social determinants of health framework. Three subscales in the Brief Opioid Overdose Knowledge questionnaire were used to measure opioid literacy. Among a sample of 253, limited opioid literacy was found. Social contact was found to be significantly associated with overall opioid literacy (B = .36, p < .05) and opioid general knowledge subscale (B = .14, p < .05). For the subscale of opioid overdose response knowledge, health insurance (B =−.59, p = .06) and social contact (B = .13, p = .07) emerged as marginally significant. The findings suggest that educational interventions are needed to increase opioid literacy among rural AAs, especially among those with limited social contact.

Implementation and maintenance of an emergency department naloxone distribution and peer recovery specialist program

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Emergency department (ED)-based naloxone distribution and peer-based behavioral counseling have been shown to be feasible, but little is known about utilization maintenance over time and clinician, patient, and visit level factors influencing implementation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of an ED overdose prevention program providing take-home naloxone, behavioral counseling, and treatment linkage for patients treated for an opioid overdose at two Rhode Island EDs from 2017 to 2020: one tertiary referral center and a community hospital. Utilizing a Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, we evaluated program reach, adoption, implementation modifiers, and maintenance using logistic and Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Seven hundred forty two patients were discharged after an opioid overdose, comprising 966 visits (median: 32 visits per month; interquartile range: 29, 41). At least one intervention was provided at most (86%, 826/966) visits. Take-home naloxone was provided at 69% of visits (637/919). Over half (51%, 495/966) received behavioral counseling and treatment referral (65%, 609/932). Almost all attending physicians provided take-home naloxone (97%, 105/108), behavioral counseling (95%, 103/108), or treatment referral (95%, 103/108) at least once. Most residents and advanced practice practitioners (APPs) provided take home naloxone (78% residents; 72% APPs), behavioral counseling (76% residents; 67% APPs), and treatment referral (80% residents; 81% APPs) at least once. Most clinicians provided these services for over half of the opioid overdose patients they cared for. Patients were twice as likely to receive behavioral counseling when treated by an attending in combination with a resident and/or APP (adjusted odds ratio: 2.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.68, 3.12) compared to an attending alone. There was no depreciation in use over time.

CONCLUSIONS

ED naloxone distribution, behavioral counseling, and referral to treatment can be successfully integrated into usual emergency care and maintained over time with high reach and adoption. Further work is needed to identify low-cost implementation strategies to improve services use and dissemination across clinical settings.

Perspectives from law enforcement officers who respond to overdose calls for service and administer naloxone

BACKGROUND

Many law enforcement agencies across the United States equip their officers with the life-saving drug naloxone to reverse the effects of an opioid overdose. Although officers can be effectively trained to administer naloxone, and hundreds of law enforcement agencies carry naloxone to reverse overdoses, little is known about what happens on scene during an overdose call for service from an officer's perspective, including what officers perceive their duties and responsibilities to be as the incident evolves.

METHODS

The qualitative study examined officers' experiences with overdose response, their perceived roles, and what happens on scene before, during, and after an overdose incident. In-person interviews were conducted with 17 officers in four diverse law enforcement agencies in the United States between January and May 2020.

RESULTS

Following an overdose, the officers described that overdose victims are required to go to a hospital or they are taken to jail. Officers also described their duties on scene during and after naloxone administration, including searching the belongings of the person who overdosed and seizing any drug paraphernalia.

CONCLUSION

These findings point to a pressing need for rethinking standard operating procedures for law enforcement in these situations so that the intentions of Good Samaritan Laws are upheld and people get the assistance they need without being deterred from asking for future help.

Warrant checking practices by post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts: A mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Post-overdose outreach programs engage survivors in harm reduction and treatment to prevent future overdoses. In Massachusetts, these emerging programs commonly deploy teams comprised of police and public health professionals based on 911 call information. Some teams use name/address data to conduct arrest warrant checks prior to outreach visits. We used mixed methods to understand approaches to outreach related to warrant checking, from the perspectives of police and public health outreach agencies and staff.

METHODS

We analyzed a 2019 statewide survey of post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts to classify approaches to warrant checking and identify program and community factors associated with particular approaches. Ethnographic analysis of qualitative interviews conducted with outreach staff helped further contextualize outreach program practices related to warrants.

RESULTS

A majority (57% - 79/138) of post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts conducted warrant checks prior to outreach. Among programs that checked warrants, we formulated a taxonomy of approaches to handling warrants: 1) performing outreach without addressing warrants (19.6% - 27/138), 2) delaying outreach until warrants are cleared (15.9% - 22/138), 3) arresting the survivor (11/138 - 8.0%), 4) taking a situational approach (10/138 - 7.2%), 5) not performing outreach (9/138 - 6.5%). Program characteristics and staff training did not vary across approaches. From police and public health outreach staff interviews (n = 38), we elicited four major themes: a) diverse motivations precede warrant checking, b) police officers feel tension between dual roles, c) warrants alter approaches to outreach, and d) teams leverage warrants in relationships. Findings from both analyses converged to demonstrate unintended consequences of warrant checking.

CONCLUSION

Checking warrants prior to post-overdose outreach visits can result in arrest, delayed outreach, and barriers to obtaining services for overdose survivors, which can undermine the goal of these programs to engage overdose survivors. With the public health imperative of engaging overdose survivors, programs should consider limiting warrant checking and police participation in field activities.

Overdose and take-home naloxone in emergency settings: A pilot study examining feasibility of delivering brief interventions addressing overdose prevention with 'take-home naloxone' in emergency departments

OBJECTIVE

Although most unintentional opioid deaths in Australia are attributed to pharmaceutical opioids, take-home naloxone (THN) programmes have to date predominantly targeted people using illicit opioids in drug treatment and harm reduction settings. We sought to examine the feasibility of delivering THN brief interventions (THN-BIs) with intranasal naloxone in EDs.

METHODS

This pilot feasibility study was conducted across three major metropolitan EDs in Sydney and Melbourne. ED staff were surveyed about their perspectives regarding THN before completing a 30-min training programme in THN-BI delivery. Patients presenting with opioid overdose or considered high risk for future overdose were eligible to receive the THN-BI. Staff survey responses were compared between hospitals and provider types using one-way analysis of variances. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were extracted from medical records and compared between hospitals and overdose type using Fisher's exact test and one-way analysis of variances.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-two ED staff completed the survey. One hundred and ten (90.2%) agreed that EDs should provide THN-BIs, whereas 23 (19.2%) identified time constraints and 17 (12.9%) felt uncomfortable discussing overdose with patients. Fifty-seven patients received the THN-BI, with the majority (n = 50, 87.7%) having presented following opioid overdose. The median age was 44 years and 40 (71.4%) were men. Two-thirds of the overdoses (n = 31, 66.0%) were attributed to heroin with one-third (n = 16, 34%) being attributed to pharmaceutical opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

ED-based delivery of THN-BIs can reach a wide range of individuals at-risk of overdose. The present study supports the feasibility of THN interventions in EDs and underscores the importance of addressing implementation barriers including staff training.

Synthetic opioids: a review and clinical update

The term 'opioids' refers to both the natural compounds ('opiates') which are extracted from the opium poppy plant (Papaver somniferum) and their semi-synthetic and synthetic derivatives. They all possess relatively similar biochemical profiles and interact with the opioid receptors within the human body to produce a wide range of physiological effects. They have historically been used for medicinal purposes, their analgesic and sedative effects, and in the management of chronic and severe pain. They have also been used for non-medicinal and recreational purposes to produce feelings of relaxation, euphoria and well-being. Over the last decade, the emergence of an illegal market in new synthetic opioids has become a major global public health issue, associated with a substantial increase in unintentional overdoses and drug-related deaths. Synthetic opioids include fentanyl, its analogues and emerging non-fentanyl opioids. Their popularity relates to changes in criminal markets, pricing, potency, availability compared to classic opioids, ease of transport and use, rapid effect and lack of detection by conventional testing technologies. This article expands on our previous review on new psychoactive substances. We now provide a more in-depth review on synthetic opioids and explore the current challenges faced by people who use drugs, healthcare professionals, and global public health systems.

Alcohol-involved overdose deaths in US veterans

BACKGROUND

Alcohol-involved overdose deaths are increasing and often occur with other substances but have been minimally studied compared to other causes of overdose.

METHODS

We used national Veterans Health Administration (VHA) records linked to National Death Index data from 2012 to 2018 to examine trends in alcohol-related overdose mortality. Patient characteristics and treatment receipt were compared across categories of alcohol overdose deaths (alcohol-only, alcohol+opioids which may include additional substances, and alcohol+other substances without opioids).

RESULTS

From 2012-2018, 2421 Veterans died from an alcohol-involved overdose (alcohol-only: 868, alcohol+opioids: 1269, alcohol+other substances: 284). The alcohol-involved overdose rate increased 57% during this period. Compared to those who died of an alcohol-only overdose, Veterans who died from alcohol+opioids and alcohol+other substances were more likely Black or Hispanic, and to have an opioid use disorder, but less likely to live in rural areas or to be diagnosed with alcohol use disorder (AUD). Only 32.5% of those who died from alcohol-involved overdose received treatment in a substance use disorder clinic in the year preceding death, compared to 65.1% seen in mental health and 85.7% in primary care. Only 9.5% of Veterans who died from alcohol overdose received medication treatment for AUD and 24.8% received psychotherapy for AUD in the year preceding death.

CONCLUSIONS

Alcohol overdose is increasing primarily related to overdoses involving opioids and other substances. Most patients did not receive any effective medication or psychotherapy treatments for AUD, suggesting further need to identify those at risk and to target treatment for this vulnerable group in healthcare settings.

Alternative use of buprenorphine among people who use opioids in three U.S. Cities

Background: Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder, yet some persons are concerned with its "alternative use" (i.e., any use unintended by the prescriber). There is limited evidence on the factors associated with alternative use of buprenorphine (AUB); in this study, we examined correlates of recent (past 6 months) AUB. Methods: Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze survey data from a multi-site, cross-sectional study of people who use drugs (PWUD) (N = 334) in Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; and Providence, Rhode Island. Results: One-fifth (20%) of the sample reported recent AUB. In adjusted analyses, significant negative correlates of AUB were female gender (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.48, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.24-0.95), recent emergency room visit (aOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.89), and recent injection drug use (aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19-0.88). Significant positive correlates were alternative use of other prescription opioids (aOR 8.32, 95% CI 4.22-16.38), three or more overdoses in the past year (aOR 3.74, 95% CI 1.53-9.17), recent buprenorphine use as prescribed (aOR 2.50, 95% CI 1.12-5.55), and recent residential rehabilitation treatment (aOR 3.71, 95% CI 1.50-9.16). Conclusions: Structural and behavioral correlates of AUB may help identify PWUD at high risk of overdose with unmet treatment needs.

Refusal to accept emergency medical transport following opioid overdose, and conditions that may promote connections to care

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose is a leading cause of death in the United States. Emergency medical services (EMS) encounters following overdose may serve as a critical linkage to care for people who use drugs (PWUD). However, many overdose survivors refuse EMS transport to hospitals, where they would presumably receive appropriate follow-up services and referrals. This study aims to (1) identify reasons for refusal of EMS transport after opioid overdose reversal; (2) identify conditions under which overdose survivors might be more likely to accept these services; and (3) describe solutions proposed by both PWUD and EMS providers to improve post-overdose care.

METHODS

The study comprised 20 semi-structured, qualitative in-depth interviews with PWUD, followed by two semi-structured focus groups with eight EMS providers.

RESULTS

PWUD cited intolerable withdrawal symptoms; anticipation of inadequate care upon arrival at the hospital; and stigmatizing treatment by EMS and hospital providers as main reasons for refusal to accept EMS transport. EMS providers corroborated these descriptions and offered solutions such as titration of naloxone to avoid harsh withdrawal symptoms; peer outreach or community paramedicine; and addressing provider burnout. PWUD stated they might accept EMS transport after overdose reversal if they were offered ease for withdrawal symptoms, at either a hospital or non-hospital facility, and treated with respect and empathy.

CONCLUSION

Standard of care by EMS and hospital providers following overdose reversal should include treatment for withdrawal symptoms, including buprenorphine induction; patient-centered communication; and effective linkage to prevention, treatment, and harm reduction services.

Facilitators and barriers to post-overdose service delivery in Rhode Island emergency departments: A qualitative evaluation

BACKGROUND

Emergency departments (EDs) in the US have increasingly incorporated interventions that seek to reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. However, many of these interventions are underutilized. This study examined ED provider-identified barriers and facilitators to policy-prescribed service provision for patients treated for an opioid overdose in Rhode Island EDs, and opportunities to improve care delivery.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 55 ED providers (management and clinical staff) across Rhode Island EDs from November 2019 to July 2020. Thematic analysis of interviews focused on gaps and best practices in post-overdose care delivery, including social and structural factors driving access to, and uptake of, services.

RESULTS

Participants highlighted how automatic service delivery (opt out vs. opt in) and the integration of peer-based services enhanced post-overdose service provision. However, social and structural factors (e.g. insurance barriers, limited outpatient treatment resources) and gaps in provider knowledge of medications for opioid use disorder created barriers to care. Addressing long ED wait times and establishing dedicated care teams for patients following an overdose were seen as critical to improving ED service delivery.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that post-overdose service delivery within EDs is a useful approach for connecting patients to services, particularly when peer support specialists are involved. However, standardizing service delivery approaches and improving provider education of harm reduction services must be prioritized alongside state-level policy changes to improve access to care for ED patients.

Evaluation of an emergency department-based opioid overdose survivor intervention: Difference-in-difference analysis of electronic health record data to assess key outcomes

BACKGROUND

In recent years, a number of emergency department (ED)-based interventions have been developed to provide supports and/or treatment linkage for people who use opioids. However, there is limited research supporting the effectiveness of the majority of these interventions. Project POINT is an ED-based intervention aimed at providing opioid overdose survivors with naloxone and recovery supports and connecting them to evidence-based medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). An evaluation of POINT was conducted.

METHODS

A difference-in-difference analysis of electronic health record data was completed to understand the difference in outcomes for patients admitted to the ED when a POINT staff member was working versus times when they were not. The observation window was January 1, 2012 to July 6, 2019, which included N = 1462 unique individuals, of which 802 were in the POINT arm. Outcomes of focus include MOUD opioid prescriptions dispensed, active non-MOUD opioid prescriptions dispensed, naloxone access, and drug poisonings.

RESULTS

The POINT arm had a significant increase in MOUD prescriptions dispensed, non-MOUD prescriptions dispensed, and naloxone access (all p-values < 0.001). There was no significant effect related to subsequent drug poisoning-related hospital admissions.

CONCLUSIONS

The results support the assertion that POINT is meeting its two primary goals related to increasing naloxone access and connecting patients to MOUD. Generalization of these results is limited; however, the evaluation contributes to a nascent area of research and can serve a foundation for future work.

Implementing hospital-based peer recovery support services for substance use disorder

BACKGROUND

The rise in drug overdose deaths in the United States necessitates novel approaches to reduce harms. In response, peer recovery support services for substance use disorder have been implemented in clinical and community settings in several states.

OBJECTIVES

This descriptive analysis aimed to describe the implementation of hospital-based peer recovery support services for substance use disorder.

METHODS

We describe the implementation of the Peer Recovery Program, which delivers recovery support services 24 hours a day, seven days a week, for patients with substance use disorder in emergency departments and inpatient settings across 20 hospitals. We report program, patient, and referral characteristics and program process measures.

RESULTS

From 2016 to 2019, Recovery Specialists received referrals during 30,263 patient visits. In 2019, 65.4% (n = 7,564) of patients were male. Across three subsamples of referrals, patient acceptance of continued recovery support services ranged from 74.8% to 83.0%. At affiliated hospitals in 2019, the median response time from referral to Recovery Specialist arrival at patient bedside was eight minutes (interquartile range = 4-16), and the median duration of initial bedside consultation was 35 minutes (interquartile range = 25-45). In 2019, Recovery Specialists and Patient Navigators attempted 113,442 follow-up contacts, and patients accepted 4,696 referrals provided by Patient Navigators to substance use disorder treatment and other medical, social, and recovery services and supports.

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes peer recovery support services for substance use disorder delivered in emergency departments and inpatient settings. Evidence of improved patient outcomes is needed prior to widespread adoption.

A Comparative Analysis of Online Versus in-Person Opioid Overdose Awareness and Reversal Training for First-Year Medical Students

Physicians trained in opioid use disorder (OUD) harm reduction can mitigate opioid overdose deaths by prescribing naloxone and educating patients about its use. Unfortunately, many physicians possess OUD stigma. Training during medical school presents an opportunity to reduce OUD stigma and improve opioid overdose reversal knowledge. This study assessed the efficacy of Opioid Overdose Awareness and Reversal Training (OOART) and evaluated the equivalency of the online and in-person OOART. Methods: Voluntary training was delivered to first-year medical (M1) students at one medical school. In 2018 and 2019, 29 and 68 M1 students, respectively, received in-person OOART training and completed pre- and post-training surveys. In 2020, 62 students participated in online OOART training, of which 53 completed both pre- and post-training surveys. Results: All three opioid overdose Knowledge questions showed significant improvements between pre- and post-training survey responses. For Attitude questions, six of eleven questions in 2019 and 2020 and four of eleven questions in 2018 had statistically significant improvements between pre- and post-training survey responses. There were no statistical differences between in-person and online post-training survey results for two out of the three Knowledge questions and all 11 Attitude questions. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that our OOART was effective in increasing opioid overdose reversal knowledge and reducing OUD stigma. There was no meaningful difference in outcomes between the training modalities. These results support the future expansion of online and in-person OOART to a larger population of medical students.

Integrating harm reduction and clinical care: Lessons from Covid-19 respite and recuperation facilities

In response to the novel coronavirus 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic, many people experiencing homelessness and substance use disorders entered respite and recuperation facilities for care and to isolate and prevent subsequent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. However, because drug use was officially prohibited in these facilities, we observed people who use substances leaving isolation temporarily or prematurely. The initial Covid-19 surge magnified the need for harm reduction access for those who use substances to ensure their safety and well-being and that of their local communities. In this commentary, we argue that expanding harm reduction access is crucial for subsequent waves of SARS-CoV-2 infection and also for patients who use substances and are hospitalized for other reasons.