Patient characteristics associated with being offered take home naloxone in a busy, urban emergency department: a retrospective chart review

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.

Top 25 Medications the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Trainee Should Know for an Emergency Medicine Department Consult

SUMMARY

Plastic surgery trainees are often called to render care in the emergency department (eg, for established patients, trauma, burns). Broad-based knowledge in pharmacotherapeutics during these encounters is critical. This includes an understanding of pain medications, anxiolytics, local anesthetics, antibiotics, anticoagulants, antidotes, and more to ensure optimal patient care. The purpose of this report is to describe 25 frequently used and other important medications that plastic surgery trainees should know for an adult emergency department encounter.

Harm reduction strategies in acute care for people who use alcohol and/or drugs: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

People who use alcohol and/or drugs (PWUAD) are at higher risk of infectious disease, experiencing stigma, and recurrent hospitalization. Further, they have a higher likelihood of death once hospitalized when compared to people who do not use drugs and/or alcohol. The use of harm reduction strategies within acute care settings has shown promise in alleviating some of the harms experienced by PWUAD. This review aimed to identify and synthesize evidence related to the implementation of harm reduction strategies in acute care settings.

METHODS

A scoping review investigating harm reduction strategies implemented in acute care settings for PWUAD was conducted. A search strategy developed by a JBI-trained specialist was used to search five databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo and Scopus). Screening of titles, abstracts and full texts, and data extraction was done in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus or with a third reviewer. Results were reported narratively and in tables. Both patients and healthcare decision makers contributing to the development of the protocol, article screening, synthesis and feedback of results, and the identification of gaps in the literature.

FINDINGS

The database search identified 14,580 titles, with 59 studies included in this review. A variety of intervention modalities including pharmacological, decision support, safer consumption, early overdose detection and turning a blind eye were identified. Reported outcome measures related to safer use, managed use, and conditions of use. Reported barriers and enablers to implementation related to system and organizational factors, patient-provider communication, and patient and provider perspectives.

CONCLUSION

This review outlines the types of alcohol and/or drug harm reduction strategies, which have been evaluated and/or implemented in acute care settings, the type of outcome measures used in these evaluations and summarizes key barriers and enablers to implementation. This review has the potential to serve as a resource for future harm reduction evaluation and implementation efforts in the context of acute care settings.

Predictors of fatal and nonfatal overdose after prescription of opioids for chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Higher doses of opioids, mental health comorbidities, co-prescription of sedatives, lower socioeconomic status and a history of opioid overdose have been reported as risk factors for opioid overdose; however, the magnitude of these associations and their credibility are unclear. We sought to identify predictors of fatal and nonfatal overdose from prescription opioids.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science up to Oct. 30, 2022, for observational studies that explored predictors of opioid overdose after their prescription for chronic pain. We performed random-effects meta-analyses for all predictors reported by 2 or more studies using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies (23 963 716 patients) reported the association of 103 predictors with fatal or nonfatal opioid overdose. Moderate- to high-certainty evidence supported large relative associations with history of overdose (OR 5.85, 95% CI 3.78-9.04), higher opioid dose (OR 2.57, 95% CI 2.08-3.18 per 90-mg increment), 3 or more prescribers (OR 4.68, 95% CI 3.57-6.12), 4 or more dispensing pharmacies (OR 4.92, 95% CI 4.35-5.57), prescription of fentanyl (OR 2.80, 95% CI 2.30-3.41), current substance use disorder (OR 2.62, 95% CI 2.09-3.27), any mental health diagnosis (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.73-2.61), depression (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.57-3.14), bipolar disorder (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.77-2.41) or pancreatitis (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.52-2.64), with absolute risks among patients with the predictor ranging from 2-6 per 1000 for fatal overdose and 4-12 per 1000 for nonfatal overdose.

INTERPRETATION

We identified 10 predictors that were strongly associated with opioid overdose. Awareness of these predictors may facilitate shared decision-making regarding prescribing opioids for chronic pain and inform harm-reduction strategies SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/vznxj/).

Electronic Advisories Increase Naloxone Prescribing Across Health Care Settings

BACKGROUND

Naloxone is a life-saving, yet underprescribed, medication that is recommended to be provided to patients at high risk of opioid overdose.

OBJECTIVE

We set out to evaluate the changes in prescriber practices due to the use of an electronic health record (EHR) advisory that prompted opioid prescribers to co-prescribe naloxone when prescribing a high-dose opioid. It also provided prescribers with guidance on decreasing opioid doses for safety.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective chart abstraction study looking at all opioid prescriptions and all naloxone prescriptions written as emergency department (ED) discharge, inpatient hospital discharge, or outpatient medications, between July 1, 2018, and February 1, 2020. The EHR advisory went live on June 1, 2019.

SUBJECTS

Included in the analysis were all adult patients seen in the abovementioned settings at a large county hospital and associated outpatient clinics.

MAIN MEASURES

We performed an interrupted time series analysis looking at naloxone prescriptions and daily opioid dosing in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), before and after initiation of the EHR advisory.

KEY RESULTS

The EHR advisory was associated with changes in prescribers' behavior, leading to increased naloxone prescriptions and decreased prescribed opioid doses.

CONCLUSIONS

EHR advisories are an effective systems-level intervention to enhance the safety of prescribed opioids and increase rates of naloxone prescribing.

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

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

Evaluating disparities in prescribing of naloxone after emergency department treatment of opioid overdose

INTRODUCTION

Patients who initially survive opioid-related overdose are at high risk for subsequent mortality. Our health system aimed to evaluate the presence of disparities in prescribing naloxone following opioid overdose.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients seen in our health system, which comprises two academic centers and eight community hospitals. Eligible patients had at least one visit to any of our hospital's emergency departments (EDs) with a diagnosis code indicating opioid-related overdose between May 1, 2018, and April 30, 2021. The primary outcome measure was prescription of nasal naloxone after at least one visit for opioid-related overdose during the study period.

RESULTS

The health system had 1348 unique patients who presented 1593 times to at least one of the EDs with opioid overdose. Of included patients, 580 (43.2%) received one or more prescriptions for naloxone. The majority (68.9%, n = 925) were male. For race/ethnicity, 74.5% (1000) were Non-Hispanic White, 8.0% (n = 108) were Non-Hispanic Black, and 13.0% (n = 175) were Hispanic/Latinx. Compared with the reference age group of 16-24 years, only those 65+ were less likely to receive naloxone (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.84). The study found no difference for gender (male aOR 1.23, 95% CI 0.97-1.57 compared to female). Hispanic/Latinx patients were more likely to receive a prescription when compared to Non-Hispanic White patients (aOR 1.72, 95% CI 1.22-2.44), while no difference occurred between Non-Hispanic Black compared to Non-Hispanic White patients (aOR 1.31, 95% CI 0.87-1.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Naloxone prescribing after overdose in our system was suboptimal, with fewer than half of patients with an overdose diagnosis code receiving this lifesaving and evidence-based intervention. Patients who were Hispanic/Latinx were more likely to receive naloxone than other race and ethnicity groups, and patients who were older were less likely to receive it. Health systems need ongoing equity-informed implementation of programs to expand access to naloxone to all patients at risk.

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.

Naloxone provision to emergency department patients recognized as high-risk for opioid use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are at increased risk for overdose and death. Clinical practice guidelines and professional organization policy statements recommend providing naloxone to patients at risk for overdose. We sought to characterize fidelity to naloxone practice recommendations in a cohort of Emergency Department (ED) patients in whom opioid use disorder was suspected by the treating physician.

METHODS

This single-center cross-sectional study evaluated electronic health records from an urban academic ED with 73,000 annual encounters in a region with a high prevalence of OUD. Patients ≥18 years old with encounters from January 1, 2018 to November 30, 2019 were included if discharged from the ED and either administered buprenorphine in the ED or referred to outpatient substance use treatment. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of included patients provided naloxone (take-home or prescription). We used random effects multivariable logistic regression (accounting for multiple patient encounters) to estimate the odds ratio (OR) for receiving naloxone.

RESULTS

Of 1036 eligible patient encounters, 320 resulted in naloxone provision (30.9%, 95% CI: 28.1-33.8). Naloxone provision occurred for 33.6% (95% CI 30.5-36.7) of 900 patients referred to outpatient substance use treatment without ED buprenorphine administration, 10.6% (95% CI 5.0-19.2) of 85 patients administered buprenorphine and not referred to outpatient substance use treatment, and 17.6% (95% CI 8.4-30.9) of 51 patients administered buprenorphine and referred to outpatient treatment. After controlling for age, sex, race, and prior provision of naloxone, the administration of buprenorphine was associated with a 94% lower odds (aOR = 0.06 [95% CI 0.011-0.33]) for naloxone provision compared to those only referred to outpatient treatment.

CONCLUSION

A majority of ED patients who received an intervention targeted at OUD, in an ED where take-home naloxone is freely available, did not receive either take-home naloxone or a prescription for naloxone at discharge. Patients receiving buprenorphine were less likely to receive naloxone than patients only referred to outpatient treatment. These data suggest barriers other than recognition of potential OUD and naloxone availability impact provision of naloxone and argue for a treatment "bundle" as a conceptual model for care of ED patients with suspected OUD.

Access and Barriers to Take-Home Naloxone Use among Emergency Department Patients with Opioid Misuse in Baltimore, Maryland, USA

The opioid epidemic has prompted the expansion of take-home naloxone (THN) distribution programs. The proportion of emergency department (ED) patients with opioid misuse who have access to a naloxone kit (NK) and barriers to using it are unclear. Objective: Characterizing the access and barrier to NK use among at-risk ED patients. Methods: We enrolled a convenience sample of ED patients with active opioid misuse from May 21-July 31, 2018. We administered a survey to collect patients' demographic data, substance use history, and access to and use of NK. The primary outcome was NK access (prior receipt of a kit or prescription); secondary outcomes were knowledge and use of NK, and barriers to obtaining and using it. Results: Of 165 respondents, 71.5% knew of THN programs and 57.6% (n = 95) had access to THN by either having received a NK (n = 90) or a prescription (n = 5); 34 respondents received both. Among 39 (23.6%) who received a naloxone prescription, 25 (64.1%) filled it. 60.0% (n = 99) reported knowing how to administer naloxone; lack of training was the primary reason (n = 63/66, 96.9%) for their unfamiliarity. Patients who presented after an opioid overdose (25.5%; n = 42) were less likely to have knowledge of THN programs (57.1% vs. 76.4%), and to have received a NK (35.7% vs. 61.0%). Conclusion: Awareness of THN programs was high among our cohort. But approximately 60% the respondents received a NK or knew how to use it. Despite efforts to expand THN access, gaps in knowledge, access, and use exist.