Basic and Advanced EMS Providers Are Equally Effective in Naloxone Administration for Opioid Overdose in Northern New England

Naloxone use by Aotearoa New Zealand emergency medical services, 2017-2021

OBJECTIVE

Emergency medical services (EMS) use of naloxone in the prehospital setting is indicated in patients who have significantly impaired breathing or level of consciousness when opioid intoxication is suspected. The present study characterised naloxone use in a nationwide sample of Aotearoa New Zealand road EMS patients to establish a baseline for surveillance of any changes in the future.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of rates of patients with naloxone administrations was conducted using Hato Hone St John (2017-2021) and Wellington Free Ambulance (2018-2021) electronic patient report form datasets. Patient demographics, presenting complaints, naloxone dosing, and initial and last vital sign clinical observations were described.

RESULTS

There were 2018 patients with an equal proportion of males and females, and patient median age was 47 years. There were between 8.0 (in 2018) and 9.0 (in 2020) naloxone administrations per 100 000 population-years, or approximately one administration per day for the whole country of 5 million people. Poisoning by unknown agent(s) was the most common presenting complaint (61%). The median dose of naloxone per patient was 0.4 mg; 85% was administered intravenously. The median observed change in Glasgow Coma Scale score was +1, and respiratory rate increased by +2 breaths/min.

CONCLUSIONS

A national rate of EMS naloxone patients was established; measured clinical effects of naloxone were modest, suggesting many patients had reasons other than opioid toxicity contributing to their symptoms. Naloxone administration rates provide indirect surveillance information about suspected harmful opioid exposures but need to be interpreted with care.

Prehospital Naloxone Administration Patterns during the Era of Synthetic Opioids

Background: The opioid epidemic is an ongoing public health emergency, exacerbated in recent years by the introduction and rising prevalence of synthetic opioids. The National EMS Scope of Practice Model was changed in 2017 to recommend allowing basic life support (BLS) clinicians to administer intranasal (IN) naloxone. This study examines local IN naloxone administration rates for 4 years after the new recommendation, and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores and respiratory rates before and after naloxone administration.Methods: This retrospective cohort study evaluated naloxone administrations between April 1st 2017 and March 31st 2021 in a mixed urban-suburban EMS system. Naloxone dosages, routes of administration, and frequency of administrations were captured along with demographic information. Analysis of change in the ratio of IN to intravenous (IV) naloxone administrations per patient was performed, with the intention of capturing administration patterns in the area. Analyses were performed for change over time of IN naloxone rates of administration, change in respiratory rates, and change in GCS scores after antidote administration. ALS and BLS clinician certification levels were also identified. Bootstrapping procedures were used to estimate 95% confidence intervals for correlation coefficients.Results: Two thousand and ninety patients were analyzed. There was no statistically significant change in the IN/parenteral ratio over time (p = 0.79). Repeat dosing increased over time from 1.2 ± 0.4 administrations per patient to 1.3 ± 0.5 administrations per patient (r = 0.078, 95% CI: 0.036 - 0.120; p = 0.036). Mean respiratory rates before (mean = 12.6 - 12.6, r = -0.04, 95% CI: -0.09 - 0.01; p = 0.1) and after (mean = 15.2 - 14.9, r = -0.03, 95% CI: -0.08 - 0.01; p = 0.172) naloxone administration have not changed. While initial GCS scores have become significantly lower, GCS scores after administration of naloxone have not changed (initial median GCS 10 - 6, p < 0.001; final median GCS 15 - 15, p = 0.23).Conclusions: Current dosing protocols of naloxone appear effective in the era of synthetic opioids in our region, although patients may be marginally more likely to require repeat naloxone doses.

Stayin' Alive in Little 5: Application of Sentiment Analysis to Investigate Emotions of Service Industry Workers Responding to Drug Overdoses

The opioid epidemic has increasingly been recognized as a public health issue and has challenged our current legal, social, and ethical beliefs regarding drug use. The epidemic not only impacts persons who use drugs, but also those around them, including people who do not expect to witness an overdose. For example, in the commercial district of Little 5 Points, Atlanta, GA, many service industry workers have become de facto responders to opioid overdoses when a person experiences an opioid-involved overdose in their place of employment. To provide additional insights into >300 pages of interview data collected from service industry workers that have responded to an opioid overdose while at work, we utilized a mixed-methods approach to conduct this sentiment analysis. First, using R version 4.2.1, a data-science based textual analytic approach was applied to the interview data. Using a corpus algorithm, each line of interview text was characterized as one of the eight following sentiments, anger, anticipation, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, surprise, or trust. Once having identified statements that fit into each of these eight codes, qualitative thematic analysis was conducted. The three most prevalent emotions elucidated from these interviews with service industry workers were trust, anticipation, and joy with 20.4%, 16.2%, and 14.7% across all statements, respectively labeled as each emotion. Thematic analysis revealed three themes in the data: (1) individuals have a part to address in the opioid epidemic, (2) communities have many needs related to the opioid crisis, and (3) structural forces create pathways and barriers to opioid overdose response and rescue. This analysis thematically identified roles service industry workers have in addressing the opioid crisis in Atlanta. Similarly, community needs and barriers to responding to an opioid-involved overdose were characterized. Uniquely, this study found key sentiments related to each of these themes. Future research can leverage these findings to inform the development of overdose prevention and response interventions for service industry works that systematically address common emotions and beliefs trainees may have.

Legal review of state emergency medical services policies and protocols for naloxone administration

BACKGROUND

Given the continued rise in opioid-related overdoses, many states have expanded access to the opioid antagonist naloxone. We sought to provide comprehensive data on one such strategy: the authority of providers at different emergency medical services (EMS) licensure levels to administer naloxone.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic legal review of state laws and protocols governing the authority of different EMS licensure levels to administer naloxone. We used Westlaw, state government websites and scope of practice protocols. We coded relevant policies regarding which, if any, administration routes and dosages of naloxone are permitted for each licensure level: emergency medical responder (EMR), emergency medical technician (EMT), advanced emergency medical technician (AEMT), and paramedic.

RESULTS

As of July 2020, all states with relevant laws or protocols authorize paramedics, AEMTs, and EMTs to administer naloxone. Thirty-nine states with an EMR licensure level and statewide protocol authorize naloxone administration by EMRs, up from only two in 2013. Permissible routes of administration have increased across all EMS provider levels, providing advanced life support providers (i.e., paramedics and AEMTs) with expanded discretion; however, authorization for intravenous and intramuscular administration remains relatively uncommon for basic life support (BLS) providers. When specified, maximum doses authorized ranged widely, from 2.0 to 12.0 milligrams.

CONCLUSIONS

Naloxone administration authority is now widely granted to EMS providers. Most states allow all licensed EMS provider levels to administer naloxone, a substantial increase for EMRs and EMTs since 2013. Paramedics and AEMTs have the greatest authority to select the dosage and route of administration.

Evaluation of Basic Life Support First Responder Naloxone Administration Protocol Adherence

Objectives: Opioid overdoses have become a significant problem across the United States resulting in respiratory depression and risk of death. Basic Life Support (BLS) first responders have had the option to treat respiratory depression using a bag-valve-mask device, however naloxone, an opioid antagonist, has been shown to quickly restore normal respiration. Since the introduction of naloxone and recent mandates across many states for BLS personnel to carry and administer naloxone, investigation into the adherence of naloxone use standing protocols is warranted.

Methods: This preliminary study examined 100 initial cases of BLS first responder administration of naloxone for appropriate indications and protocol adherence.

Results: This study found that n=22/100 naloxone administrations were inappropriate, often given to patients who were not suffering from respiratory depression (n=11/22). Positive pressure ventilation (PPV) was not administered prior to naloxone in n=56/100 cases, of which n=42/100 had an inadequate respiratory effort documented. For patients with a known history of substance use disorder, there was a significant increase in administration of naloxone prior to PPV (60%; n=33/55) compared to patients without a known history (30%; n=9/30).

Conclusion: Overall these preliminary data suggest that during BLS naloxone administration, the majority of cases did not follow at least one component of the standard protocol for patients with respiratory depression. This study suggests that further education and more research are needed to better understand the decision-making processes of prehospital providers to ensure adherence to standard protocols.

Prehospital Naloxone and Emergency Department Adverse Events: A Dose-Dependent Relationship

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate prehospital and emergency department (ED) interventions and outcomes of patients who received prehospital naloxone for a suspected opioid overdose.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to evaluate if the individual dose, individual route, total dose, number of prehospital naloxone administrations, or occurrence of a prehospital adverse event (AE) were associated with the occurrence of AEs in the ED. Secondary objectives included a subset analysis of patients who received additional naloxone while in the ED, or were admitted to an intensive care or step-down unit (ICU).

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational chart review of adult patients who received prehospital naloxone and were transported by ambulance to a suburban academic tertiary care center between 2014 and 2017. Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate statistics were used, with p < 0.05 indicating significance.

RESULTS

There were 513 patients included in the analysis, with a median age of 29 years, and median total prehospital naloxone dose of 2 mg. An increasing number of prehospital naloxone doses, an occurrence of a prehospital AE, and a route of administration other than intranasally for the first dose of prehospital naloxone were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of an ED AE. Patients who received < 2 mg of prehospital naloxone had the least likelihood of being admitted to an ICU, whereas patients who received at least 6 mg had a dramatically increased likelihood of ICU admission.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that an increasing number of prehospital naloxone doses was significantly associated with an increased likelihood of an ED adverse event.

A review of performance assessment tools for rescuer response in opioid overdose simulations and training programs

Since the 1990s, more than 600 overdose response training and education programs have been implemented to train participants to respond to an opioid overdose in the United States. Given this substantial investment in overdose response training, valid assessment of a potential rescuers' proficiency in responding to an opioid overdose is important. The aim of this article is to review the current state of the literature on outcome measures utilized in opioid overdose response training. Thirty-one articles published between 2014 and 2020 met inclusion criteria. The reviewed articles targeted laypersons, healthcare providers, and first responders. The assessment tools included five validated questionnaires, fifteen non-validated questionnaires, and nine non-validated simulation-based checklists (e.g., completion of critical tasks and time to completion). Validated multiple choice knowledge assessment tools were commonly used to assess the outcomes of training programs. It is unknown how scores on these assessment tools may correlate with actual rescuer performance responding to an overdose. Seven studies reported ceiling effects most likely attributed to participants' background medical knowledge or experience. The inclusion of simulation-based outcome measures of performance, including the commission of critical errors and the time to naloxone administration, provides better insight into rescuer skill proficiency.

A mixed-methods approach to understanding overdose risk-management strategies among a nationwide convenience sample

BACKGROUND

This mixed-methods study compared drug use histories between individuals who had a reported non-fatal overdose to individuals who did not and described the overdose risk-management strategies as they were experienced by a sample of people who use drugs (PWUD). Shifts from non-medical prescription opioid use (NMPOU) to the use of heroin and synthetic opioids have been implicated in national increases in overdose incidences in the United States. However, relatively limited data exists regarding the narrative experiences of the evolving overdose risk management strategies among a nationwide sample of PWUD.

METHODS

Data recruitment was conducted via Amazon's mTurk crowdsourcing technology and was collected through semi-structured interviews that occurred in 2019. Participants (N = 60) with a history of NMPOU with transition to heroin or fentanyl use were recruited.

RESULTS

Participants reporting a previous non-fatal overdose were more likely to report a history of injection drug use, a history of heroin injection, greater overdose risk knowledge, and current medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) use. Qualitative analysis revealed that participants attempted to mitigate overdose risk in primarily three ways: 1) self-regulation; 2) harm reduction; and 3) passive approach. Self-regulatory measures included administering small or incremental dosing, being mindful of personal tolerance limits, and avoiding the initiation of injection drug use. Harm reduction measures used to protect from overdose included carrying Narcan and relying on trusted drug-suppliers as references to drug purity. A passive approach indicated that participants relied on "luck" or divine support systems where religiosity and faith were endorsed as factors that mitigated personal overdose risk.

CONCLUSION

Participants reported successful overdose mitigation via self-regulation, which may suggest that PWUDs were capable at managing their drug use amid the overdose crisis. The importance of the drug-supplier relationship was critical to many in reducing their overdose risk as formal harm reduction services (e.g., safe injection sites) remain inaccessible in the U.S. Implications for drug policy and harm reduction interventions are discussed.

Endogenous Opiates and Behavior: 2018

This paper is the forty-first consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2018 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 (2), the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia in animals (3) and humans (4), opioid-sensitive and opioid-insensitive effects of nonopioid analgesics (5), opioid peptide and receptor involvement in tolerance and dependence (6), stress and social status (7), learning and memory (8), eating and drinking (9), drug abuse and alcohol (10), sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (11), mental illness and mood (12), seizures and neurologic disorders (13), electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (14), general activity and locomotion (15), gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (16), cardiovascular responses (17), respiration and thermoregulation (18), and immunological responses (19).

One year mortality of patients treated with naloxone for opioid overdose by emergency medical services

Study objective: Prehospital use of naloxone for presumed opioid overdose has increased markedly in recent years because of the current opioid overdose epidemic. In this study, we determine the 1-year mortality of suspected opioid overdose patients who were treated with naloxone by EMS and initially survived. Methods: This was a retrospective observational study of patients using three linked statewide datasets in Massachusetts: emergency medical services (EMS), a master demographics file, and death records. We included all suspected opioid overdose patients who were treated with naloxone by EMS. The primary outcome measures were death within 3 days of treatment and between 4 days and 1 year of treatment. Results: Between July 1, 2013 and December 31, 2015, there were 9734 individuals who met inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. Of these, 807 (8.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.7-8.8%)) died in the first 3 days, 668 (6.9% (95% CI 6.4-7.4%)) died between 4 days and 1 year, and 8259 (84.8% (95% CI 84.1-85.6%)) were still alive at 1 year. Excluding those who died within 3 days, 668 of the remaining 8927 individuals (7.5% (95% CI 6.9-8.0%)) died within 1 year. Conclusion: The 1-year mortality of those who are treated with naloxone for opioid overdose by EMS is high. Communities should focus both on primary prevention and interventions for this patient population, including strengthening regional treatment centers and expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative naloxone distribution strategies: First responder and lay distribution in the United States

BACKGROUND

The U.S. is facing an unprecedented number of opioid-related overdose deaths, and an array of other countries have experienced increases in opioid-related fatalities. In the U.S., naloxone is increasingly distributed to first responders to improve early administration to overdose victims, but its cost-effectiveness has not been studied. Lay distribution, in contrast, has been found to be cost-effective, but rising naloxone prices and increased mortality due to synthetic opioids may reduce cost-effectiveness. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of increased naloxone distribution to (a) people likely to witness or experience overdose ("laypeople"); (b) police and firefighters; (c) emergency medical services (EMS) personnel; and (d) combinations of these groups.

METHODS

We use a decision-analytic model to analyze the cost-effectiveness of eight naloxone distribution strategies. We use a lifetime horizon and conduct both a societal analysis (accounting for productivity and criminal justice system costs) and a health sector analysis. We calculate: the ranking of strategies by net monetary benefit; incremental cost-effectiveness ratios; and number of fatal overdoses.

RESULTS

High distribution to all three groups maximized net monetary benefit and minimized fatal overdoses; it averted 21% of overdose deaths compared to minimum distribution. High distribution to laypeople and one of the other groups comprised the second and third best strategies. The majority of health gains resulted from increased lay distribution. In the societal analysis, every strategy was cost-saving compared to its next-best alternative; cost savings were greatest in the maximum distribution strategy. In the health sector analysis, all undominated strategies were cost-effective. Results were highly robust to deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing naloxone distribution to laypeople and first responder groups would maximize health gains and be cost-effective. If feasible, communities should distribute naloxone to all groups; otherwise, distribution to laypeople and one of the first responder groups should be emphasized.

A Comparison of Efficacy of Treatment and Time to Administration of Naloxone by BLS and ALS Providers

Introduction:

The administration of naloxone therapy is restricted by scope of practice to Advanced Life Support (ALS) in many Emergency Medical Services (EMS) systems throughout the United States. In Delaware’s two-tiered EMS system, Basic Life Support (BLS) often arrives on-scene prior to ALS, but BLS providers were not previously authorized to administer naloxone. Through a BLS naloxone pilot study, the researchers sought to evaluate BLS naloxone administration and timing compared to ALS.

Hypothesis:

After undergoing specialized training, BLS providers would be able to appropriately administer naloxone to opioid overdose patients in a more timely manner than ALS providers.

Methods:

This was a retrospective, observational study using data collected from February 2014 through May 2015 throughout a state BLS naloxone pilot program. A total of 14 out of 72 state BLS agencies participated in the study. Pilot BLS agencies attended a training session on the indications and administration of naloxone, and then were authorized to carry and administer naloxone. Researchers then compared vital signs and the time of BLS arrival to administration of naloxone by BLS and ALS. Data were analyzed using paired and independent sample t-tests, as well as chi-square, as appropriate.

Results:

A total of 131 incidents of naloxone administration were reviewed. Of those, 62 patients received naloxone by BLS (pilot group) and 69 patients received naloxone by ALS (control group). After naloxone administration, BLS patients showed improvements in heart rate (HR; P &lt; .01), respiratory rate (RR; P &lt; .01), and pulse oximetry (spO2; P &lt; .01); ALS patients also showed improvement in RR (P &lt; .01), and in spO2 (P = .005). There was no significant improvement in HR for ALS providers (P = .189).

There was a significant difference in arrival time of BLS to the time of naloxone administration between the two groups, with shorter times in the BLS group compared to the ALS group (1.9 minutes versus 9.8 minutes; P &lt; .01); BLS administration was 7.8 minutes faster when compared to ALS administration (95% CI, 6.2-9.3 minutes).

Conclusions:

Patients improved similarly and received naloxone therapy sooner when treated by BLS agencies carrying naloxone than those who awaited ALS arrival. All EMS systems should consider allowing BLS to carry and administer naloxone for an effective and potentially faster naloxone administration when treating respiratory compromise related to opiate overdose.

Identifying high-risk areas for nonfatal opioid overdose: a spatial case-control study using EMS run data

PURPOSE

The objective of our study was to incorporate stricter probable nonfatal opioid overdose case criteria, and advanced epidemiologic approaches to more reliably detect local clustering in nonfatal opioid overdose activity in EMS runs data.

METHODS

Data were obtained using emsCharts for our study area in southwestern Pennsylvania from 2007 to 2018. Cases were identified as emergency medical service (EMS) responses where naloxone was administered, and improvement was noted in patient records between initial and final Glasgow Coma Score. A subsample of all-cause EMS responses sites were used as controls and exact matched to cases on sex and 10-year-age category. Clustering was assessed using difference in Ripley's K function for cases and controls and Kulldorff scan statistics.

RESULTS

Difference in K functions indicated no significant difference in probable nonfatal overdose EMS runs across the study area compared to all-cause EMS runs. However, scan statistics did identify significant local clustering of probable nonfatal overdose EMS runs (maximum likelihood = 16.40, P = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

Results highlight relevance of EMS data to detect community-level overdose activity and promote reliable use through stricter case definition criteria and advanced methodological approaches. Techniques examined have the potential to improve targeted delivery of neighborhood-level public health response activities using a near real-time data source.

Descriptive, observational study of pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical arrests, use, and overdoses in Maine

OBJECTIVES

The Maine Diversion Alert Program grants healthcare providers access to law enforcement data on drug charges. The objectives of this report were to analyse variations in drug charges by demographics and examine recent trends in arrests, prescriptions of controlled substances and overdoses.

DESIGN

Observational.

SETTING

Arrests, controlled prescription medication distribution and overdoses in Maine.

PARTICIPANTS

Drug arrestees (n=1272) and decedents (n=2432).

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Arrestees were analysed by sex and age. Substances involved in arrests were reported by schedule (I-V or non-controlled prescription) and into opioids, stimulants or other classes. Controlled substances reported to the Drug Enforcement Administration (2007-2017) were evaluated. Drug-induced deaths (2007-2017) reported to the medical examiner were examined by the substance(s) identified.

RESULTS

Males were more commonly arrested for stimulants and schedule II substances. More than two-thirds of arrests involved individuals under the age of 40. Individuals age >60 were elevated for oxycodone arrests. Over three-fifths (63.38%) of arrests involved schedule II-IV substances. Opioids accounted for almost half (44.6%) of arrests followed by stimulants (32.5%) and sedatives (9.1%). Arrests involving buprenorphine exceeded those for oxycodone, hydrocodone, methadone, tramadol and morphine, combined. Prescriptions for hydrocodone (-56.0%) and oxycodone (-46.9%) declined while buprenorphine increased (+58.1%) between 2012 and 2017. Deaths from 2007 to 2017 tripled. Acetylfentanyl and furanylfentanyl were the most common fentanyl analogues identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the overall profile of those arrested for drug crimes in 2017 involve males, age <40 and heroin, exceptions (oxycodone for older adults) were observed. Most prescription opioids are decreasing while deaths involving opioids continue to increase in Maine.

National Systematic Legal Review of State Policies on Emergency Medical Services Licensure Levels' Authority to Administer Opioid Antagonists

OBJECTIVE

Previous research conducted in November 2013 found there were a limited number of states and territories in the United States (US) that authorize emergency medical technicians (EMTs) and emergency medical responders (EMRs) to administer opioid antagonists. Given the continued increase in the number of opioid-related overdoses and deaths, many states have changed their policies to authorize EMTs and EMRs to administer opioid antagonists. The goal of this study is to provide an updated description of policy on EMS licensure levels' authority to administer opioid antagonists for all 50 US states, the District of Columbia (DC), and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (PR).

METHODS

State law and scopes of practice were systematically reviewed using a multi-tiered approach to determine each state's legally-defined EMS licensure levels and their authority to administer an opioid antagonist. State law, state EMS websites, and state EMS scope of practice documents were identified and searched using Google Advanced Search with Boolean Search Strings. Initial results of the review were sent to each state office of EMS for review and comment.

RESULTS

As of September 1, 2017, 49 states and DC authorize EMTs to administer an opioid antagonist. Among the 40 US jurisdictions (39 states and DC) that define the EMR or a comparable first responder licensure level in state law, 37 states and DC authorize their EMRs to administer an opioid antagonist. Paramedics are authorized to administer opioid antagonists in all 50 states, DC, and PR. All 49 of the US jurisdictions (48 states and DC) that define the advanced emergency medical technician (AEMT) or a comparable intermediate EMS licensure level in state law authorize their AEMTs to administer an opioid antagonist.

CONCLUSIONS

49 out of 52 US jurisdictions (50 states, DC, and PR) authorize all existing levels of EMS licensure levels to administer an opioid antagonist. Expanding access to this medication can save lives, especially in communities that have limited advanced life support coverage.