The Impact of a Peer-Navigator Program on Naloxone Distribution and Buprenorphine Utilization in the Emergency Department

Willingness to Provide Naloxone Resources for Patients at Risk of Opioid Overdose: A National Survey of Emergency Registered Nurses

INTRODUCTION

Opioid-related events continue to claim lives in the United States at alarming rates. Naloxone-dispensing rates fall dramatically short of national expectations. Emergency registered nurses are uniquely poised to connect at-risk patients with naloxone resources. This study sought to (1) describe the emergency registered nurses' willingness to provide naloxone resources and (2) explore variables that may influence the nurse's willingness to provide resources.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, survey-based design was deployed using an online branch logic approach to include a national sample of emergency registered nurses. The Willingness to Provide, a validated questionnaire, measured the registered nurse's willingness to provide naloxone resources for patients at risk of opioid overdose. Eight variables were assessed for potential influence on willingness.

RESULTS

A total of 159 nurses from 32 states and the District of Columbia completed the online survey via the Research Electronic Data Capture platform. The results revealed a mean Willingness to Provide score of 38.64 indicating a willingness to provide naloxone resources. A statistically significant relationship was identified between the nurse's willingness and years of nursing experience (P = .001), knowledge (P = .015), desire (P = .001), and responsibility (P < .001).

DISCUSSION

In this representative sample, emergency nurses are willing to provide naloxone resources; furthermore, results indicate that higher knowledge, desire, and responsibility scores increase the nurse's willingness to provide naloxone resources; with education and clear expectations, emergency nurses may be able to improve the connection of patients at risk of opioid overdose with naloxone, a potentially lifesaving connection.

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.

Naloxone distribution programs in the emergency department: A scoping review of the literature

This scoping review summarized the literature regarding naloxone distribution from emergency departments (EDs) without a prescription. Our intention was to examine various naloxone distribution programs, their methodologies, and the level of effectiveness of each. Understanding these key aspects of naloxone distribution could lead to improved standardized protocols, saving countless additional lives from opioid overdose. This review evaluated studies reporting naloxone distribution from EDs in the United States. The included studies were written in English and published between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2022. Searches were performed using PubMed and Embase. A total of 129 studies were reviewed, with only 12 meeting the necessary criteria for analysis. Heterogeneity was found across naloxone distribution programs, including how patients were identified, how naloxone was dispensed to patients, and the specific naloxone products made available. The protocols included various methods, such as patient screening, where information used for this screening was sometimes obtained from health records or patient interviews. Some programs detailed only the distribution of naloxone, while others included additional interventions such as behavior counseling, peer support, and education. In four studies, patients received buprenorphine with naloxone kits. The various programs differed in their implementation but were generally successful in improving naloxone distribution. However, among the studies reviewed, the percentage of ED patients receiving naloxone varied from ∼30% to 70%, suggesting that certain program elements may be more impactful. Further research is needed to identify key elements of the most impactful programs in order to improve naloxone distribution and improve patient odds of surviving an opioid overdose.

Emergency Department Peer Support Program and Patient Outcomes After Opioid Overdose

Importance

Patients treated in emergency departments (EDs) for opioid overdose often need drug treatment yet are rarely linked to services after discharge. Emergency department-based peer support is a promising approach for promoting treatment linkage, but evidence of its effectiveness is lacking.

Objective

To examine the association of the Opioid Overdose Recovery Program (OORP), an ED peer recovery support service, with postdischarge addiction treatment initiation, repeat overdose, and acute care utilization.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This intention-to-treat retrospective cohort study used 2014 to 2020 New Jersey Medicaid data for Medicaid enrollees aged 18 to 64 years who were treated for nonfatal opioid overdose from January 2015 to June 2020 at 70 New Jersey acute care hospitals. Data were analyzed from August 2022 to November 2023.

Exposure

Hospital OORP implementation.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) initiation within 60 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes included psychosocial treatment initiation, medically treated drug overdoses, and all-cause acute care visits after discharge. An event study design was used to compare 180-day outcomes between patients treated in OORP hospitals and those treated in non-OORP hospitals. Analyses adjusted for patient demographics, comorbidities, and prior service use and for community-level sociodemographics and drug treatment access.

Results

A total of 12 046 individuals were included in the study (62.0% male). Preimplementation outcome trends were similar for patients treated in OORP and non-OORP hospitals. Implementation of the OORP was associated with an increase of 0.034 (95% CI, 0.004-0.064) in the probability of 60-day MOUD initiation in the half-year after implementation, representing a 45% increase above the preimplementation mean probability of 0.075 (95% CI, 0.066-0.084). Program implementation was associated with fewer repeat medically treated overdoses 4 half-years (-0.086; 95% CI, -0.154 to -0.018) and 5 half-years (-0.106; 95% CI, -0.184 to -0.028) after implementation. Results differed slightly depending on the reference period used, and hospital-specific models showed substantial heterogeneity in program outcomes across facilities.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of patients treated for opioid overdose, OORP implementation was associated with an increase in MOUD initiation and a decrease in repeat medically treated overdoses. The large variation in outcomes across hospitals suggests that treatment effects were heterogeneous and may depend on factors such as implementation success, program embeddedness, and availability of other hospital- and community-based OUD services.

Perspectives of healthcare workers on the integration of overdose detection technologies in acute care settings

BACKGROUND

People who use drugs (PWUD) face disproportionately high rates of hospitalizations and patient-initiated discharge (leaving against medical advice), explained by a combination of stigma, withdrawal, judgment, blame, and improper pain management. In addition, evidence has shown that despite abstinence-based policies within healthcare settings, PWUD continue to use their substances in healthcare environments often hidden away from hospital staff, resulting in fatalities. Various novel overdose detection technologies (ODTs) have been developed with early adoption in a few settings to reduce the morbidity and mortality from risky substance use patterns within healthcare environments. Our study aimed to gain the perspectives of healthcare workers across Canada on implementing ODTs within these settings.

METHOD

We used purposive and snowball sampling to recruit 16 healthcare professionals to participate in semi-structured interviews completed by two evaluators. Interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key themes and subthemes.

RESULTS

Participants recognized ODTs as a potentially feasible solution for increasing the safety of PWUD in healthcare settings. Our results suggest the mixed ability of these services to decrease stigma and build rapport with PWUD. Participants further highlighted barriers to implementing these services, including pre-established policies, legal recourse, and coordination of emergency responses to suspected overdoses. Lastly, participants highlight that ODTs should only be one part of a multifaceted approach to reducing harm in healthcare settings and could currently be integrated into discharge planning.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare professionals from across Canada found ODTs to be an acceptable intervention, but only as part of a larger suite of harm reduction interventions to reduce the harms associated with illicit drug use in healthcare settings. In contrast, participants noted institutional policies, stigma on behalf of healthcare workers and leadership would present significant challenges to their uptake and dissemination.

Providing peer navigation services to women with a history of opioid misuse pre- and post-release from jail: A program description

Background:

Justice system-involved women with opioid use disorder (OUD) experience layered health risks and stigma, yet peer navigation services during reentry may support positive outcomes. This manuscript offers a program description of a women’s peer navigation intervention delivered pre- and post-release from jail to remove barriers to women’s access to OUD treatment, including medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD).

Methods:

All data were collected as part of a NIH/NIDA-funded national cooperative, the Justice Community Opioid Innovation Network (JCOIN) project. Through the larger study’s intervention, women in jail with OUD are connected via videoconference to a peer navigator, who provides an initial reentry recovery assessment and 12+ weeks of recovery support sessions post-release. Qualitative analyses examined peers’ notes from initial sessions with women (N = 50) and in-depth interviews with peers (N = 3).

Results:

Peers’ notes from initial sessions suggest that women anticipate challenges to successful recovery and community reentry. More than half of women (51.9%) chose OUD treatment as their primary goal, while others selected more basic needs (e.g. housing, transportation). In qualitative interviews, peers described women’s transitions to the community as unpredictable, creating difficulties for reentry planning, particularly for rural women. Peers also described challenges with stigma against MOUD and establishing relationships via telehealth, but ultimately believed their role was valuable in providing resource referrals, support, and hope for recovery.

Conclusions:

For women with OUD, peer navigation can offer critical linkages to services at release from jail, in addition to hope, encouragement, and solidarity. Findings provide important insights for future peer-based interventions.