Pharmacists’ experiences with a statewide naloxone standing order program in Massachusetts: a mixed methods study

ObjectivesIn a prior statewide naloxone purchase trial conducted in Massachusetts, we documented a high rate of naloxone dispensing under the state’s standing order program. The purpose of this study was to understand the factors that facilitate naloxone access under the Massachusetts naloxone standing order (NSO) program and identify any remaining barriers amenable to intervention.DesignMixed methods design involving a pharmacist survey and 3 pharmacist focus groups.Setting and participantsFocus groups were conducted at 3 separate professional conferences for pharmacists (n = 27). The survey was conducted among Massachusetts pharmacists (n = 339) working at a stratified random sample chain and independent retail pharmacies across Massachusetts. All data were collected between September 2018 and November 2019.Outcome measuresFacilitators and barriers to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing and pharmacists’ attitudes and beliefs regarding naloxone and opioid use.ResultsMost pharmacists described NSO implementation as being straightforward, although differences were reported by pharmacy type in both the survey and focus groups. Facilitators included centralized implementation at chain pharmacies, access to Web-based resources, regularly stocking naloxone, and use of naloxone-specific intake forms. Barriers included patient confidentiality concerns and payment/cost issues. Only 31% of surveyed pharmacists reported always providing naloxone counseling; the most commonly cited barriers were perceived patient discomfort (21%) and time limitations (14%). Confidential space was also more of a concern for independent (vs. chain) pharmacists (18% vs. 6%, P = 0.008). A majority of pharmacists held supportive attitudes toward naloxone, although some reported having moral/ethical concerns about naloxone provision.ConclusionWe documented several facilitators to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing. Areas for improvement include addressing stigma and misconceptions around opioids and naloxone use. These remain important targets for improving pharmacy-based naloxone dispensing, although our overall positive results suggest Massachusetts’ experience with NSO implementation can inform other states’ efforts to expand pharmacy-based naloxone access.     

Pharmacy leaders’ beliefs about how pharmacies can support a sustainable approach to providing naloxone to the community

BackgroundNaloxone is an antidote to opioid overdose, and community pharmacies nationwide now provide broad access to this medication.ObjectiveThe aim of this qualitative study was to understand how leaders in pharmacy organizations perceive pharmacies and pharmacy staff can optimize dispensing of naloxone.MethodsIn-depth interviews were conducted with 12 pharmacy leaders in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Participants were recruited from three types of community pharmacies: (1) chain; (2) independent; and (3) hospital outpatient. Theory-driven immersion crystallization, using Brownlee et al.'s model of healthcare quality improvement, was used to inform coding of the interview data, with predetermined categories of staff; organization; and process.ResultsFive main themes were identified: (1) Importance of staff training to increase comfort; (2) Strength through coordination of efforts; (3) Pharmacy as a community leader in the opioid crisis; (4) Persisting stigma; and (5) Ongoing workflow challenges.ConclusionsThe results uniquely reflect the experiences and insights of pharmacy leaders implementing public health initiatives during the opioid crisis and can be used for gaining insight into how pharmacists can efficiently provide naloxone to their communities.     

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

BackgroundFatal opioid overdoses remain the leading cause of accidental deaths in the United States, which have contributed to implementation of standing order laws that allow pharmacists to dispense naloxone to patients. Although pharmacy distribution of naloxone is a promising approach to increase access to this intervention, understanding barriers preventing greater uptake of this service is needed.MethodsData for the current study were collected via telephone survey assessing the availability of various formulations of naloxone at chain and independent pharmacies in rural and urban areas in Birmingham, Alabama (N = 222). Pharmacists’ attitudes toward naloxone and potential barriers of pharmacy naloxone distribution were also assessed. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and logistic regression analyses were utilized to examine differences in stocking of naloxone in chain and independent pharmacies and to determine predictors of the number of kits dispensed by pharmacies.ResultsIndependent pharmacies were less likely to have naloxone in stock, especially those in rural areas. Furthermore, rural pharmacies required more time to obtain all four formulations of naloxone, and offered less extensive training on naloxone use. Pharmacists endorsing the belief that naloxone allows avoidance of emergent treatment in an overdose situation was associated with fewer dispensed kits by the pharmacies. Over 80% of pharmacists endorsed at least one negative belief about naloxone (e.g., allowing riskier opioid use). Pharmacists noted cost to patients and the pharmacy as contributing to not dispensing more naloxone kits.ConclusionThe current study demonstrates the lower availability of naloxone stocked at pharmacies in independent versus chain pharmacies, particularly in rural communities. This study also highlights several barriers preventing greater naloxone dispensing including pharmacists’ attitudes and costs of naloxone. The potential benefit of standing order laws is not being fully actualized due to the structural and attitudinal barriers identified in this study. Strategies to increase naloxone access through pharmacy dispensing are discussed.     

Routine opioid outcome monitoring in community pharmacy: Pilot implementation study protocol

BackgroundIncreases in opioid use and related harms such as mortality are occurring in many high income countries. Community pharmacists are often in contact with patients at risk of opioid-related harm and represent an ideal point for intervention. Best practice in monitoring opioid-related outcomes involves assessing analgesia, pain functioning, mood, risks and harms associated with opioid use. Community pharmacists are well-placed to undertake these tasks.ObjectivesOur pilot study will test the implementation of a computer-facilitated screening and brief intervention (SBI). The SBI will support pharmacist identification of opioid-related problems and provide capacity for brief intervention including verbal reinforcement of tailored information sheets, supply of naloxone and referral back to the opioid prescriber. The SBI utilises software that embeds study procedures into dispensing workflow and assesses opioid outcomes with domains aligned with a widely accepted clinical framework.MethodsWe will recruit and train 75 pharmacists from 25 pharmacies to deliver the Routine Opioid Outcome Monitoring (ROOM) SBI. Pharmacists will complete the SBI with up to 500 patients in total (20 per pharmacy). Data will be collected on pharmacists’ knowledge and confidence through pre- and post-intervention online surveys. Data on feasibility, acceptability and implementation outcomes, including naloxone supply, will also be collected.Project impactOur study will examine changes in pharmacists’ knowledge and confidence to deliver the SBI. Through the implementation pilot, we will establish the feasibility and acceptability of a pharmacist SBI that aims to improve monitoring and clinical management of patients who are prescribed opioids.     

Reviewing state-mandated training requirements for naloxone-dispensing pharmacists

Background

Expanding access to naloxone is crucial for mitigating the public health epidemic of opioid overdose deaths in America. Pharmacists now have greater independent authority to dispense naloxone to the public due to a wave of enhanced pharmacy naloxone access laws. It is unknown to what extent pharmacists are required to receive specialized training to serve in this capacity.