Decision-making by laypersons equipped with an emergency response smartphone app for opioid overdose

BackgroundTargeted naloxone distribution to potential lay responders increases the timeliness of overdose response and reduces mortality. Little is known, however, about the patterns of decision-making among overdose lay responders. This study explored heuristic decision-making among laypersons equipped with an emergency response smartphone app.MethodsUnityPhilly, a smartphone app that connects lay responders equipped with naloxone to overdose victims, was piloted in Philadelphia from March 2019 to February 2020. Participants used the app to signal overdose alerts to peer app users and emergency medical services, or respond to alerts by arriving at overdose emergency sites. This study utilised in-depth interviews, background information, and app use data from a sample of 18 participants with varying histories of opioid use and levels of app use activity.ResultsThe sample included 8 people who used opioids non-medically in the past 30 days and 10 people reporting no opioid misuse. Three prevailing, not mutually exclusive, heuristics were identified. The heuristic of unconditional signalling (“Always signal for help or backup”) was used by 7 people who valued external assistance and used the app as a replacement for a 911 call; this group had the highest number of signalled alerts and on-scene appearances. Nine people, who expressed confidence in their ability to address an overdose themselves, followed a heuristic of conditional signalling (“Rescue, but only signal if necessary”); these participants had the highest frequency of prior naloxone administrations. Eleven participants used the heuristic of conditional responding (“Assess if I can make a difference”), addressing an alert if they carried naloxone, were nearby, or received a signal before dark hours.ConclusionThe deployment of specific heuristics was influenced by prior naloxone use and situational factors. Success of overdose prevention interventions assisted by digital technologies may depend on the involvement of people with diverse overdose rescue backgrounds.     

Providers' perceptions on barriers and facilitators to prescribing naloxone for patients at risk for opioid overdose after implementation of a national academic detailing program: A qualitative assessment

BackgroundAcademic detailing is an educational outreach program that aligns providers' prescribing with evidence-based practice. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Opioid Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) Program partnered with the VA Pharmacy Benefits Management National Academic Detailing Service to deliver naloxone education to providers who cared for patients at risk of opioid overdose. In this pilot study, we interviewed providers’ who received academic detailing to capture their perceptions of facilitators and barriers to prescribing naloxone.ObjectiveTo identify providers’ perceptions of facilitators and barriers to prescribing naloxone for patients at risk for opioid overdose after implementation of a national academic detailing program.MethodsThis was a hybrid inductive-deductive qualitative pilot using semi-structured interviews with VA providers to explore constructs associated with facilitators and barriers to prescribing take-home naloxone to patients at risk for opioid overdose from August 2017 to April 2018.ResultsEleven participants were interviewed, six physicians, three clinical psychiatric pharmacists, and two nurse practitioners. Participants identified patient-level barriers (social stigma and lack of homeless patient support), poor data integration, and burden of data validation as barriers to prescribing naloxone. However, they also identified patient lists, repeat visits, and face-to-face/one-on-one video conferencing visits as important facilitators for naloxone prescribing.Conclusions/importanceAcademic detailing will need to address issues of social stigma regarding naloxone, educate providers about existing support systems for homeless veterans, and develop tools for data integration to improve naloxone access for veterans at risk for an opioid overdose.     

Social and structural aspects of the overdose risk environment in St. Petersburg, Russia

BackgroundWhile overdose is a common cause of mortality among opioid injectors worldwide, little information exists on opioid overdoses or how context may influence overdose risk in Russia. This study sought to uncover social and structural aspects contributing to fatal overdose risk in St. Petersburg and assess prevention intervention feasibility.MethodsTwenty-one key informant interviews were conducted with drug users, treatment providers, toxicologists, police, and ambulance staff. Thematic coding of interview content was conducted to elucidate elements of the overdose risk environment.ResultsSeveral factors within St. Petersburg's environment were identified as shaping illicit drug users’ risk behaviours and contributing to conditions of suboptimal response to overdose in the community. Most drug users live and experience overdoses at home, where family and home environment may mediate or moderate risk behaviours. The overdose risk environment is also worsened by inefficient emergency response infrastructure, insufficient cardiopulmonary or naloxone training resources, and the preponderance of abstinence-based treatment approaches to the exclusion of other treatment modalities. However, attitudes of drug users and law enforcement officials generally support overdose prevention intervention feasibility. Modifiable aspects of the risk environment suggest community-based and structural interventions, including overdose response training for drug users and professionals that encompasses naloxone distribution to the users and equipping more ambulances with naloxone.ConclusionLocal social and structural elements influence risk environments for overdose. Interventions at the community and structural levels to prevent and respond to opioid overdoses are needed for and integral to reducing overdose mortality in St. Petersburg.     

A qualitative study of repeat naloxone administrations during opioid overdose intervention by people who use opioids in New York City.

BackgroundTake-home naloxone (THN) kits have been designed to provide community members (including people who use drugs, their families and/or significant others) with the necessary resources to address out-of-hospital opioid overdose events. Kits typically include two doses of naloxone. This 'twin-pack' format means that lay responders need information on how to use each dose. Advice given tends to be based on dosage algorithms used by medical personnel. However, little is currently known about how and why people who use drugs, acting as lay responders, decide to administer the second dose contained within single THN kits. The aim of this article is to explore this issue.MethodsData were generated from a qualitative semi-structured interview study that was embedded within a randomised controlled trial examining the risks and benefits of Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) training in New York City (NYC). Analysis for this article focuses upon the experiences of 22 people who use(d) opioids and who provided repeat naloxone administrations (RNA) during 24 separate overdose events. The framework method of analysis was used to compare the time participants believed had passed between each naloxone dose administered (‘subjective response interval’) with the ‘recommended response interval’ (2–4 minutes) given during OEND training. Framework analysis also charted the various reasons and rationale for providing RNA during overdose interventions.ResultsWhen participants’ subjective response intervals were compared with the recommended response interval for naloxone dosing, three different time periods were reported for the 24 overdose events: i. ‘two doses administered in under 2 minutes’ (n = 10); ii. ‘two doses administered within 2–4 minutes’ (n = 7), and iii. ‘two doses administered more than 4 minutes apart’ (n = 7). A variety of reasons were identified for providing RNA within each of the three categories of response interval. Collectively, reasons for RNA included panic, recognition of urgency, delays in retrieving naloxone kit, perceptions of recipients’ responsiveness/non-responsiveness to naloxone, and avoidance of Emergency Response Teams (ERT).ConclusionFindings suggest that decision-making processes by people who use opioids regarding how and when to provide RNA are influenced by factors that relate to the emergency event. In addition, the majority of RNA (17/24) occurred outside of the recommended response interval taught during OEND training. These findings are discussed in terms of evidence-based intervention and ‘evidence-making intervention’ with suggestions for how RNA guidance may be developed and included within future/existing models of OEND training.     

Legacies of the war on drugs: Next of kin of persons who died of opioid overdose and harm reduction interventions in Philadelphia

BackgroundBetween the years 2017–2019 in Philadelphia, more than 70% of all deaths from opioid overdose occurred in a private residence. To learn more about home-based opioid use and overdose, researchers conducted qualitative interviews with next of kin of overdose victims to learn their perceptions about the decedent's drug use and their opinions about city-led harm reduction efforts, specifically naloxone administration and collaborative efforts to open an overdose prevention site.MethodsIn 2019, researchers conducted 35 qualitative interviews with next of kin of persons who died of opioid overdose in Philadelphia in 2017. Data were coded and analyzed using NVivo software.ResultsData reveal that while persons who use drugs may benefit from enhanced harm reduction interventions that target their family members and caregivers including naloxone education and public health messaging about overdose prevention, these efforts may be up against other realities that Philadelphia families navigate—in particular structural inequalities exacerbated by decades of “War on Drugs” policies.ConclusionExisting health disparities and structural barriers to care increase vulnerability to overdose and highlight the urgency to collaborate with impacted families and communities to design relevant harm reduction interventions. Without efforts to redress the consequences of war on drug policies, however, harm reduction interventions will not reach their full potential.     

Opiate use disorders and overdose: Medical students' experiences,satisfaction with learning,and attitudes toward community naloxone provision

IntroductionOpiate use disorder is a common condition in healthcare services in Ireland, where over 200 opiate overdose deaths occur annually. There is limited addiction medicine education at undergraduate level and medical graduates may not be adequately prepared to diagnose and manage opioid use disorders and emergency drug overdose presentations. Therefore, we examined final-year medical students' learning experiences and attitudes toward opioid use disorder, overdose and community naloxone provision as an emerging overdose treatment.MethodsWe administered an anonymous paper-based survey to 243 undergraduate medical students undertaking their final professional completion module prior to graduation from University College Dublin, Ireland. Results were compared with parallel surveys of General Practitioners (GPs) and GP trainees.ResultsA total of 197 (82.1%) completed the survey. Just under half were male, and most were aged under 25 (63.3%) and of Irish nationality (76.7%). The students felt moderately prepared to recognise opioid use disorder, but felt less prepared to manage other aspects of its care. Most had taken a history from a patient with an opioid use disorder (82.8%), and a third had witnessed at least one opioid overdose. Although 10.3% had seen naloxone administered, most had never administered naloxone themselves (98.5%). Half supported wider naloxone availability; this was lower than support rates among GPs (63.6%) and GP trainees (66.1%).ConclusionsOur findings suggest an unmet learning need in undergraduate training on opioid use disorder, with potential consequences for patient care.     

Evaluation of an overdose prevention and response training programme for injection drug users in the Skid Row area of Los Angeles,CA

BackgroundFatal opioid overdose is a significant cause of mortality among injection drug users (IDUs).MethodsWe evaluated an overdose prevention and response training programme for IDUs run by a community-based organisation in Los Angeles, CA. During a 1-h training session participants learned skills to prevent, recognise, and respond to opioid overdoses, including: calling for emergency services, performing rescue breathing, and administering an intramuscular injection of naloxone (an opioid antagonist). Between September 2006 and January 2008, 93 IDUs were trained. Of those, 66 (71%) enrolled in the evaluation study and 47 participants (71%) completed an interview at baseline and 3-month follow-up.ResultsTwenty-one percent of participants were female, 42% were white, 29% African American, and 18% Latino. Most were homeless or lived in temporary accommodation (73%). We found significant increases in knowledge about overdose, in particular about the use of naloxone. Twenty-two participants responded to 35 overdoses during the follow-up period. Twenty-six overdose victims recovered, four died, and the outcome of five cases was unknown. Response techniques included: staying with the victim (85%), administering naloxone (80%), providing rescue breathing (66%), and calling emergency services (60%). The average number of appropriate response techniques used by participants increased significantly from baseline to follow-up (p < 0.05). Half (53%) of programme participants reported decreased drug use at follow-up.ConclusionOverdose prevention and response training programmes may be associated with improved overdose response behaviour, with few adverse consequences and some unforeseen benefits, such as reductions in personal drug use.     

Promoting opioid overdose prevention and recovery: An exploratory study of an innovative intervention model to address opioid abuse

BackgroundFatal opioid overdose is a national public health concern in the United States and a critical problem confronting New Jersey’s addiction treatment system. New Jersey developed an innovative program, the Opioid Overdose Recovery Program (OORP), to address the epidemic and the issue of low treatment admissions following a non-fatal overdose. The OORP utilizes an intervention model with peer recovery specialists (RSs) and patient navigators (PNs) to engage individuals within emergency departments (EDs) immediately following an opioid overdose reversal. The purpose of this exploratory s/tudy was to examine the process through which the OORP was implemented in its first year and determine facilitators and barriers to implementation.MethodsData were collected in 2016–2017, through 17 telephone interviews and focus groups with 39 participants. Participants were OORP staff and stakeholders selected through purposeful, non-random sampling. Standardized, open-ended interview guides were used. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify, analyze, and report overall patterns.ResultsParticipants detailed stories from the field and policymakers illuminated the process of implementation. Findings revealed logistical barriers to treatment including patients’ lack of insurance and cell phones, lack of immediately available detox beds, and program ineligibility for some patients due to medical conditions. The model using peers as first responders had a positive impact as their experiences with addiction enabled them to more successfully engage patients. The PNs were critical in addressing high needs for case management and referral and external partners were also important for implementation.ConclusionsResults underscore the effort needed to integrate this important model within EDs as part of a multi-level approach to address opioid misuse. The identified challenges led to statewide strategic planning and areas for further development. OORP is a promising intervention that might increase the number of individuals suffering with opioid disorders linked to peer support, treatment and recovery.     

Brief overdose education can significantly increase accurate recognition of opioid overdose among heroin users

BackgroundIn an effort to increase effective intervention following opioid overdose, the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) has implemented programs where bystanders are given brief education in recognizing the signs of opioid overdose and how to provide intervention, including the use of naloxone. The current study sought to assess the ability of NYSDOH training to increase accurate identification of opioid and non-opioid overdose, and naloxone use among heroin users.MethodsEighty-four participants completed a test on overdose knowledge comprised of 16 putative overdose scenarios. Forty-four individuals completed the questionnaire immediately prior to and following standard overdose prevention training. A control group (n = 40), who opted out of training, completed the questionnaire just once.ResultsOverdose training significantly increased participants’ ability to accurately identify opioid overdose (p < 0.05), and scenarios where naloxone administration was indicated (p < 0.05). Training did not alter recognition of non-opioid overdose or non-overdose situations where naloxone should not be administered.ConclusionsThe data indicate that overdose prevention training improves participants’ knowledge of opioid overdose and naloxone use, but naloxone may be administered in some situations where it is not warranted. Training curriculum could be improved by teaching individuals to recognize symptoms of non-opioid drug over-intoxication.     

A qualitative study of a publicly funded pharmacy-dispensed naloxone program

AimsTo characterize the experiences of individuals accessing pharmacy-based naloxone and relate these experiences to the risk environments and discourses in which they are embedded.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study using in-depth interviews of 37 adults aged 18 years and over who had accessed pharmacy-dispensed naloxone. Participants were recruited from across Ontario, Canada, and comprised individuals taking opioids for chronic pain, those taking opioids for reasons other than chronic pain, and individuals acquiring naloxone to act as bystanders in an opioid overdose setting. We drew upon risk environment theory to interpret participants’ accounts.ResultsFollowing analysis and interpretation, we generated five theoretically-informed themes characterizing the experiences of individuals accessing pharmacy-dispensed naloxone: ‘intersection of naloxone narrative with pharmacy environment’, ‘individual risk environment and pharmacy-dispensed naloxone uptake’, ‘safe spaces: creating an enabling environment for pharmacy-dispensed naloxone’, ‘individuation: becoming a first responder’ and 'beyond naloxone: the macro risk environment’. Specifically, participants described how judgement and stereotyping associated with the broader naloxone narrative can be amplified in the space of the pharmacy, leading to fears of reprisals and strategies to mitigate social risk. In addition, the social construction of naloxone as a drug for ‘problematic’ opioid use and a lack of pharmacist awareness regarding the risk environments in which opioid use occurs was perceived to limit opportunities for optimizing naloxone distribution and training. Finally, participants described approaches that could create enabling environments in the space of the pharmacy while remaining cognizant of the structural changes required in the macro risk environments of people who take opioids.ConclusionsDespite increasing the availability of naloxone, participants characterized several social and environmental factors that could limit the accessibility of the drug from pharmacies. Strategies to address these factors could create enabling environments within pharmacies that optimize the reach and impact of pharmacy-dispensed naloxone.     

Correlates of seeking emergency medical help in the event of an overdose in British Columbia,Canada: Findings from the Take Home Naloxone program

BackgroundBritish Columbia (BC), Canada, is experiencing an unprecedented number of opioid overdoses mainly due to the contamination of illicit drugs with fentanyl and its analogues. Reluctance to seek emergency medical help (i.e., by calling 9-1-1) has been identified as a barrier to optimal care for overdose victims. This study aimed to identify the correlates of seeking help during an overdose event when naloxone was administered via BC’s Take Home Naloxone (THN) program.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, we reviewed administrative records (from July 2015 to December 2017) about overdose events submitted by THN participants when they received their replacement naloxone kits (n = 2350). The primary outcome of the study was reported calling 9-1-1 and modified Poisson regression models were built to investigate the factors associated with help-seeking during an overdose event.ResultsMost overdose victims were men (69.0%) and >30 years old (61.5%). Overall, participants reported calling 9-1-1 in 1310 (55.7%) overdose events. In the multivariable model, the likelihood of calling 9-1-1 was significantly and positively associated with the overdose victim being male and receiving rescue breathing. The likelihood of calling 9-1-1 was significantly and negatively associated with the overdoses occurring in private residences and health regions other than Vancouver Coastal which delivers services to mostly urban residents.ConclusionOverall, medical help was sought for 55.7% of overdoses where naloxone was administered. Overdoses occurring among male victims as well as those receiving higher doses of naloxone and mouth-to-mouth rescue breathing were associated with a higher likelihood of help-seeking by responders. Future interventions need to encourage people who witness an overdose to seek emergency medical help.     

A micro-environmental intervention to reduce the harms associated with drug-related overdose: evidence from the evaluation of Vancouver's safer injection facility

BackgroundConventional drug overdose prevention strategies have been criticised for failing to address the macro- and micro-environmental factors that shape drug injecting practices and compromise individual ability to reduce the risks associated with drug-related overdose. This in turn has led to calls for interventions that address overdose risks by modifying the drug-using environment, including the social dynamics within them. Safer injection facilities (SIFs) constitute one such intervention, although little is known about the impact of such facilities on factors that mediate risk for overdose.MethodsSemi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with fifty individuals recruited from a cohort of SIF users in Vancouver, the Scientific Evaluation Of Supervised Injecting (SEOSI). Audio recorded interviews elicited injection drug users’ (IDU) accounts of overdoses as well as perspectives regarding the impact of SIF use on overdose risk and experiences of overdose. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a thematic analysis was conducted.ResultsFifty IDU, including 21 women, participated in this study. The perspectives of participants suggest that the Vancouver SIF plays an important role in mediating various risks associated with overdose. In particular, the SIF addresses many of the unique contextual risks associated with injection in public spaces, including the need to rush injections due to fear of arrest. Further, SIF use appears to enable overdose prevention by simultaneously offsetting potential social risks associated with injecting alone and injecting in the presence of strangers. The immediate emergency response offered by nurses at the SIF was also valued highly, especially when injecting adulterated drugs and drugs of unknown purity and composition.ConclusionThe perspectives of IDU participating in this study suggest that SIFs can address many of the micro-environmental factors that drive overdose risk and limit individual ability to employ overdose prevention practices. Although challenges related to coverage remain in many settings, SIFs may play a unique role in managing overdoses, particularly those occurring within street-based drug scenes.     

Non-fatal opioid overdose,naloxone access,and naloxone training among people who recently used opioids or received opioid agonist treatment in Australia: The ETHOS Engage study

BackgroundOverdose is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among people who use opioids. Naloxone can reverse opioid overdoses and can be distributed and administered with minimal training. People with experience of overdose are a key population to target for overdose prevention strategies. This study aims to understand if factors associated with recent non-fatal opioid overdose are the same as factors associated with naloxone access and naloxone training in people who recently used opioids or received opioid agonist treatment (OAT).MethodsETHOS Engage is an observational study of people who inject drugs in Australia. Logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios for non-fatal opioid overdose, naloxone access and naloxone training.ResultsBetween May 2018-September 2019, 1280 participants who recently used opioids or received OAT were enrolled (62% aged >40 years; 35% female, 80% receiving OAT, 62% injected drugs in the preceding month). Recent opioid overdose (preceding 12 months) was reported by 7% of participants, lifetime naloxone access by 17%, and lifetime naloxone training by 14%. Compared to people receiving OAT with no additional opioid use, recent opioid, benzodiazepine (preceding six months), and hazardous alcohol use was associated with recent opioid overdose (aOR 3.91; 95%CI: 1.68–9.10) and lifetime naloxone access (aOR 2.12; 95%CI 1.29–3.48). Among 91 people who reported recent overdose, 65% had never received take-home naloxone or naloxone training.ConclusionsAmong people recently using opioids or receiving OAT, benzodiazepine and hazardous alcohol use is associated with non-fatal opioid overdose. Not all factors associated with non-fatal overdose correspond to factors associated with naloxone access. Naloxone access and training is low across all groups. Additional interventions are needed to scale up naloxone provision.     

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.     

Opioid overdose prevention education for medical students: Adopting harm reduction into mandatory clerkship curricula

Abstract

Background: Opioid overdose deaths constitute a public health crisis in the United States. Strategies for reducing opioid-related harm are underutilized due in part to clinicians’ low knowledge about harm reduction theory and limited preparedness to prescribe naloxone. Educational interventions are needed to improve knowledge and attitudes about, and preparedness to address, opioid overdoses among medical students. Methods: Informed by the Department of Veterans Affairs’ Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) program and narrative medicine, we developed and led a mandatory workshop on harm reduction for clerkship medical students. Using validated scales, we assessed students’ knowledge and attitudes about, and preparedness to address, opioid overdoses before the workshop and 6 weeks after. Results: Of 75 participating students from February through December 2017, 55 (73%) completed pre-workshop and 38 (51%) completed both pre- and post-workshop surveys. At baseline, 40 (73%) encountered patients with perceived at-risk opioid use in the previous 6 weeks, but only 11 (20%) recalled their teams prescribing naloxone for overdose prevention. Among those completing both surveys, knowledge about and preparedness to prevent overdose showed large improvement (Cohen’s d?=?0.85, P?<?.001; Cohen’s d?=?1.24, P?<?.001, respectively) and attitudes showed moderate improvement (Cohen’s d?=?0.32, P = .04). Discussion: Educational interventions grounded in harm reduction theory can increase students’ knowledge and attitudes about, and preparedness to address, opioid overdoses.     

Impact of training for healthcare professionals on how to manage an opioid overdose with naloxone: effective, but dissemination is challenging

Background

Opioid overdose has a high mortality, but is often reversible with appropriate overdose management and naloxone (opioid antagonist). Training in these skills has been successfully trialled internationally with opioid users themselves. Healthcare professionals working in substance misuse are in a prime position to deliver overdose prevention training to drug users and may themselves witness opioid overdoses. The best method of training dissemination has not been identified. The study assessed post-training change in clinician knowledge for managing an opioid overdose and administering naloxone, evaluated the ‘cascade method’ for disseminating training, and identified barriers to implementation.

Methods

A repeated-measures design evaluated knowledge pre-and-post training. A sub-set of clinicians were interviewed to identify barriers to implementation. Clinicians from addiction services across England received training. Participants self-completed a structured questionnaire recording overdose knowledge, confidence and barriers to implementation.

Results

One hundred clinicians were trained initially, who trained a further 119 clinicians (n = 219) and thereafter trained 239 drug users. The mean composite score for opioid overdose risk signs and actions to be taken was 18.3/26 (±3.8) which increased to 21.2/26 (±4.1) after training, demonstrating a significant improvement in knowledge (Z = 9.2, p < 0.001). The proportion of clinicians willing to use naloxone in an opioid overdose rose from 77% to 99% after training. Barriers to implementing training were clinician time and confidence, service resources, client willingness and naloxone formulation.

Conclusions

Training clinicians how to manage an opioid overdose and administer naloxone was effective. However the ‘cascade method’ was only modestly successful for disseminating training to a large clinician workforce, with a range of clinician and service perceived obstacles. Drug policy changes and improvements to educational programmes for drug services would be important to ensure successful implementation of overdose training internationally.