The role of take-home naloxone in the epidemic of opioid overdose involving illicitly manufactured fentanyl and its analogs

Introduction: There has been an exponential increase in overdose fatalities as illicitly manufactured fentanyl and its analogs (IMF) are becoming more prevalent in the illicit drug supply. In response, overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs have been implemented throughout the United States as a harm reduction strategy. However, there are increasing reports that higher naloxone doses or repeat administration might be required for overdose victims involving IMF.

Areas covered: In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of the epidemiology, public health impact, and pharmacologic properties of IMF. The pharmacokinetic properties of currently available take-home naloxone (THN) kits, the role of THN as a harm reduction strategy and available data on its clinical use are discussed. Implications of occupational IMF exposure for first responders are also described.

Expert opinion: THN administration by a bystander is an effective harm reduction intervention. However, there is growing evidence that higher dose or multiple administrations of naloxone are required to fully reverse IMF related toxicity. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration approved THN kits with a concentrated naloxone dose that produce high bioavailability. However, limited presence of OEND programs and cost of these new devices impede their accessibility to the general public.     

Opioid overdose prevention training with naloxone,an adjunct to basic life support training for first-year medical students

ABSTRACT

Background: Opioid overdose deaths have reached epidemic proportions in the United States. This problem stems from both licit and illicit opioid use. Prescribing opioids, recognizing risky use, and initiating prevention, including opioid overdose prevention training (OOPT), are key roles physicians play. The American Heart Association (AHA) modified their basic life support (BLS) algorithms to consider naloxone in high-risk populations and when a pulse is appreciated; however, the AHA did not provide OOPT. The authors' intervention filled this training deficiency by teaching medical students opioid overdose resuscitation with a Train-the-Trainer model as part of mandatory BLS training. Methods: The authors introduced OOPT, following a Train-the-Trainer model, into the required basic life support (BLS) training for first-year medical students at a single medical school in a large urban area. The authors administered pre- and post-evaluations to assess the effects of the training on opioid overdose knowledge, self-reported preparedness to respond to opioid overdoses, and attitudes towards patients with substance use disorders (SUDs). Results: In the fall 2014, 120 first-year medical students received OOPT. Seventy-three students completed both pre- and posttraining evaluations. Improvements in knowledge about and preparedness to respond to opioid overdoses were statistically significant (P < .01) and large (Cohen's D = 2.70 and Cohen's D = 2.10, respectively). There was no statistically significant change in attitudes toward patients with SUDs. Conclusions: The authors demonstrated the effectiveness of OOPT as an adjunct to BLS in increasing knowledge about and preparedness to respond to opioid overdoses; improving attitudes toward patients with SUDs likely requires additional intervention. The authors will characterize knowledge and preparedness durability, program sustainability, and long-term changes in attitudes in future evaluations. These results support dissemination of OOPT as a part of BLS training for all medical students, and potentially all BLS providers.     

Awareness of state legislation on naloxone accessibility associated with willingness to prescribe naloxone

ABSTRACT

Background: Increasing rates of opioid-related deaths, state naloxone legislation changes, and negativity prompted investigation of predictive factors associated with willingness to prescribe naloxone to populations at risk of overdose, including knowledge of risk factors, assessment of persons at risk, awareness of legislative changes, perceptions of professional responsibility, and confidence around naloxone prescribing and distribution. Methods: Cross-sectional, Web-based, anonymous, voluntary survey to prescribers of 2 regional health care systems serving urban and rural North Dakota, northern Minnesota, and northwestern Wisconsin. Human subject research was approved by university and health care systems' institutional review boards. Results: Overall, 203 of 1586 prescribers responded; however, not all prescribers completed each survey item. A majority (89.4%, n = 127/142) of respondents had never prescribed naloxone for overdose prevention. Willingness to prescribe naloxone for 4 patient care scenarios involving substantial opioid overdose risk ranged from 43.4% to 70.5%. Knowledge mean score was 15.5 (SD = 2.9) out of 22 with median 15 (range: 5–22). Naloxone legislation awareness score was 8.8 (SD = 3.8) out of 15 with median 8 (range: 3–15). There was a statistically significant but modest correlation between willingness to prescribe naloxone and the other variables, including awareness of state naloxone-related legislation (r = 0.43, P < .0001), level of self-confidence about dosing, prescribing, and writing protocols for naloxone (r = 0.37, P < .0001), general knowledge (r = 0.24, P = .0032), and perception of professional responsibility (r = 0.19, P = .03). Multivariate regression analysis indicated willingness to prescribe naloxone was associated with statistically significant predictors, including awareness of the naloxone laws (P = .0016) and self-confidence about dosing, prescribing, and writing protocols (P = .0011). Conclusions: Prescribers who are more aware of state laws regarding naloxone and confident in their knowledge of dosing, administration, and writing protocols may be more willing to prescribe naloxone.     

From Peers to Lay Bystanders: Findings from a Decade of Naloxone Distribution in Pittsburgh,PA

Distribution of the opioid overdose reversal drug naloxone has been central to efforts to combat the ongoing opioid epidemic in the United States. This report presents data from Prevention Point Pittsburgh (PPP), a public health advocacy and direct service organization that has operated an overdose prevention program (OPP) with naloxone distribution since 2005. The program initially provided naloxone training and distribution only to people who use opioids (PWUO). In 2015, a change to state law enabled PPP to provide naloxone to anyone in a position to respond to an opioid-related overdose. This report examines the characteristics and naloxone-related experiences of 1330 PWUO trained in overdose prevention and naloxone administration by PPP between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2015, and compares rates of return for a naloxone refill by PWUO and the 619 non-users trained between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015. While larger numbers of individuals obtained naloxone after state law changed, PWUO—especially heroin users—were significantly more likely to reverse an overdose and return to PPP for a naloxone refill. Based on these findings, we recommend that resource-limited, community-based organizations prioritize the distribution of naloxone to PWUO.     

Benefits and barriers to expanding the availability of take-home naloxone in Australia: A qualitative interview study with service providers

Aims: To investigate the perspectives and experiences of service providers regarding provision of take-home naloxone to people who use opioids in Victoria, Australia. Methods: Content analysis of qualitative semi-structured interviews with 15 service providers who are either involved with take-home naloxone programs or whose work brings them in contact with people who use opioids. Findings: Statements about take-home naloxone were universally positive. Both direct and indirect benefits of take-home naloxone were described. Alongside potential reductions in opioid overdose-related harms, service providers highlighted the empowering effects of providing people who use opioids with take-home naloxone. No significant risks were described. Service providers supported the expansion of naloxone availability, but also identified several intertwined barriers to doing so. Key among these were costs, current regulations and scheduling, availability of prescribers and stigma related to illicit and injecting drug use. Conclusions: Expanding the availability of naloxone is a key component of strategies to reduce harms associated with opioid overdose. Our article provides Australian evidence of the successful operational implementation of peer-to-peer THN delivery within a range of drug primary health services and needle syringe programs. Further research is required to better understand the implications of and impediments to scale-up of this potentially life-saving public health intervention.