Amount of naloxone used to reverse opioid overdoses outside of medical practice in a city with increasing illicitly manufactured fentanyl in illicit drug supply

Background: Illicitly manufactured fentanyl (IMF) prevalence has increased. However, there is uncertainty about naloxone dose(s) used by nonmedical bystanders to reverse opioid overdoses in the context of increasing IMF. Methods: We used community naloxone distribution program data about naloxone doses and fatal opioid overdoses from the Allegheny County Medical Examiner. From January 2013 to December 2016, staff interviewed participants who administered naloxone in response to 1072 overdoses. We calculated frequencies, percentages, and conducted a 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results: Despite increases in fentanyl-contributed deaths, there were no statistically significant differences between any of the 4 years (2013–2016) on average number of naloxone doses used by participants to reverse an overdose (F = 0.88; P = .449). Conclusion: Even though IMF is more potent than heroin and is a rapidly increasing contributor to drug overdose deaths in Allegheny County, the average dose of naloxone administered has not changed. Our findings differ from studies in different areas also experiencing increasing IMF prevalence. Additional investigations are needed to clarify the amount of naloxone needed to reverse opioid overdoses in the community caused by new synthetic opioids.     

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.     

Concerns that an opioid antidote could “make things worse”: Profiles of risk compensation beliefs using the Naloxone-Related Risk Compensation Beliefs (NaRRC-B) scale

Abstract

Background and aims: As opioid overdose death rates reach epidemic proportions in the United States, the widespread distribution of naloxone is imperative to save lives. However, concerns that people who use drugs will engage in riskier drug behaviors if they have access to naloxone remain prevalent, and the measurement scales to assess these risk compensation concerns remain under researched. This study aims to examine the validity of the Naloxone-Related Risk Compensation Beliefs (NaRRC-B) scale and to understand the effect of overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) training on risk compensation beliefs across demographic and professional populations. Methods: A total of 1424 participants, 803 police officers, 137 emergency medical services (EMS)/fire personnel, and 484 clinical treatment and social service providers were administered surveys before and after attending an OEND training. Survey items measured the endorsement of opioid overdose knowledge and attitudes, as well as risk compensation beliefs. Results: Police and EMS/fire personnel expressed greater endorsement of risk compensation beliefs than clinical treatment and social service providers at both pre- and post-OEND training. Although endorsement of risk compensation beliefs was significantly reduced in each of the 3 groups after the training, reductions were greatest among EMS/fire personnel, followed by providers, then police. Moreover, younger, male, and black participants endorsed greater beliefs in risk compensatory behaviors as compared with their older, female, and white counterparts. Conclusion: This study validated a novel measure of naloxone-related risk compensation beliefs and suggests participating in OEND trainings decreases beliefs in naloxone-related risk compensation behaviors. OEND trainings should consider addressing concerns about naloxone “enabling” drug use, particularly in law enforcement settings, to continue to reduce stigma surrounding naloxone availability.     

Law enforcement attitudes towards naloxone following opioid overdose training

ABSTRACT

Background: Opioid intoxication and overdoses are life-threatening emergencies requiring rapid treatment. One response to this has been to train law enforcement to detect the signs of an opioid overdose and train them to administer naloxone to reverse the effects. Although not a new concept, few studies have attempted to examine this policy. Methods: At 4 different locations in Indiana, law enforcement personnel were trained to detect the signs of an opioid-related overdose and how to administer naloxone to reverse the effects of the overdose. Pre and post surveys were administered at each location (N = 97). To examine changes in attitudes following training, the authors included items from the Opioid Overdose Attitudes Scale (OOAS), which measures respondents' competency, concerns, and readiness to administer naloxone. Results: Among the full sample, naloxone training resulted in significant increases in competency, concerns, and readiness. Examining changes in attitudes by each location revealed that the training had the greatest effect on competency to administer naloxone and in easing concerns that law enforcement personal might have in administering naloxone. Conclusions: This study adds to others in showing that law enforcement personnel are receptive to naloxone training and that the OOAS is able to capture these attitudes. This study advances this literature by examining pre-post changes across multiple locations. As the distribution of naloxone continues to proliferate, this study and the OOAS may be valuable towards the development of an evidence-based training model for law enforcement.     

Opioid-overdose laws association with opioid use and overdose mortality

IntroductionSince the 1990's, governmental and non-governmental organizations have adopted several measures to increase access to the opioid overdose reversal medication naloxone. These include the implementation of laws that increase layperson naloxone access and overdose-specific Good Samaritan laws that protect those reporting overdoses from criminal sanction. The association of these legal changes with overdose mortality and non-medical opioid use is unknown. We assess the relationship of (1) naloxone access laws and (2) overdose Good Samaritan laws with opioid-overdose mortality and non-medical opioid use in the United States.MethodsWe used 2000–2014 National Vital Statistics System data, 2002–2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health data, and primary datasets of the location and timing of naloxone access laws and overdose Good Samaritan laws.ResultsBy 2014, 30 states had a naloxone access and/or Good Samaritan law. States with naloxone access laws or Good Samaritan laws had a 14% (p = 0.033) and 15% (p = 0.050) lower incidence of opioid-overdose mortality, respectively. Both law types exhibit differential association with opioid-overdose mortality by race and age. No significant relationships were observed between any of the examined laws and non-medical opioid use.ConclusionsLaws designed to increase layperson engagement in opioid-overdose reversal were associated with reduced opioid-overdose mortality. We found no evidence that these measures were associated with increased non-medical opioid use.     

Combined oral prolonged-release oxycodone and naloxone in opioid-induced bowel dysfunction: review of efficacy and safety data in the treatment of patients experiencing chronic pain

Importance of the field: Despite proven analgesic efficacy, opioid use is associated with frequently dose-limiting bowel dysfunction that seriously impacts patients' quality of life (QoL). Agents used at present to manage opioid-induced constipation do not address the underlying opioid receptor-mediated cause of bowel dysfunction and are often ineffective. There is, therefore, a significant need for more effective treatment options. The combination of the strong opioid oxycodone and the opioid antagonist naloxone has the potential to prevent opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD) while maintaining analgesic efficacy.

Objective: To review the safety and efficacy of oral prolonged-release (PR) oxycodone/naloxone in the treatment of patients experiencing chronic pain.

Areas covered in this review: A MEDLINE search was done (January 2002 – July 2009) for available literature for prolonged release oxycodone and naloxone in different patient groups. Results were limited to English-language and clinical trials. Data were also obtained from congress materials.

What knowledge the reader will gain: Unmet needs of opioid pain treatment in terms of OIBD, reduced QoL and low treatment compliance, leading to reduced efficacy. A data overview demonstrates the efficacy and tolerability of PR oxycodone/naloxone in the management of severe chronic pain without the burden of severe gastrointestinal adverse events. The combined formulation of a highly effective opioid and an antagonist that acts locally to reduce gastrointestinal side effects is expected to simplify pain management.

Take home message: The combination of PR oxycodone/naloxone offers the potential of maintaining normal bowel function in patients requiring opioid therapy – it is a strong analgesic that is well tolerated.     

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.     

Evaluation of overdose prevention trainings in New York City: Knowledge and self-efficacy among participants 12 months after training

ABSTRACT

Background: Prevention of unintentional opioid overdose deaths is effective through overdose prevention trainings (OPTs), in which laypersons are taught overdose response through six actions. This longitudinal study examines trainee knowledge 12 months after OPT completion. Methods: Participants were enrolled following OPT at six sites. At the 12-month follow-up, participants were asked to name the drug overdoses that naloxone reverses and name overdose response actions. A 6-point scale was created and was comprised of the number of correct overdose response actions mentioned (check breathing; administer sternum rub; call 911; give rescue breathing; administer naloxone; put victim in recovery position). Mean knowledge was compared by participant sociodemographic characteristics, confidence, and site of OPT training (indoors versus outdoors). Results: Of 344 OPT participants, 273 were reached at 12 months. Nearly all (99%) participants identified that naloxone reverses heroin overdoes; 77% identified that naloxone reverses opioid analgesics overdoses; and 68% identified that naloxone reverses methadone overdoses. Overdose response actions most frequently mentioned were giving naloxone (86%) and calling 911 (76%). The remaining four actions were mentioned by less than 40% of participants. Overall mean knowledge score was 2.7 out of 6. Mean knowledge scores were higher for college graduates than those with less than college education (3.2 vs 2.6, P < 0.001), for those who felt very confident (mean score [ms] = 2.9), compared to somewhat confident (ms = 2.4) and a little or not at all confident (ms = 1.5) in their ability to reverse an overdose (P < .001), and for indoor-training recipients (3.0 vs 2.5, P = 0.02). There were no differences in mean knowledge scores for trainees by age, race, or gender. Conclusions: These findings suggest the need for several improvements in OPT curriculum, including emphasis on naloxone reversal of opioid analgesic and methadone overdoses, and all 6 rescue actions. Lower knowledge scores among outdoor-trained participants likely reflect session brevity, suggesting that outdoor trainings need to be enhanced.     

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.     

High enhancer,downer, withdrawal helper: Multifunctional nonmedical benzodiazepine use among young adult opioid users in New York City

BackgroundBenzodiazepines are a widely prescribed psychoactive drug; in the U.S., both medical and nonmedical use of benzodiazepines has increased markedly in the past 15 years. Long-term use can lead to tolerance and dependence, and abrupt withdrawal can cause seizures or other life-threatening symptoms. Benzodiazepines are often used nonmedically in conjunction with other drugs, and with opioids in particular—a combination that can increase the risk for fatal and non-fatal overdose. This mixed-methods study examines nonmedical use of benzodiazepines among young adults in New York City and its relationship with opioid use.MethodsFor qualitative analysis, 46 90-minute semi-structured interviews were conducted with young adult opioid users (ages 18–32). Interviews were transcribed and coded for key themes. For quantitative analysis, 464 young adult opioid users (ages 18–29) were recruited using Respondent-Driven Sampling and completed structured interviews. Benzodiazepine use was assessed via a self-report questionnaire that included measures related to nonmedical benzodiazepine and opioid use.ResultsParticipants reported using benzodiazepines nonmedically for a wide variety of reasons, including: to increase the high of other drugs; to lessen withdrawal symptoms; and to come down from other drugs. Benzodiazepines were described as readily available and cheap. There was a high prevalence (93%) of nonmedical benzodiazepine use among nonmedical opioid users, with 57% reporting regular nonmedical use. In bivariate analyses, drug-related risk behaviours such as polysubstance use, drug binging, heroin injection and overdose were strongly associated with regular nonmedical benzodiazepine use. In multivariate analysis, growing up in a middle-income household (earning between $51,000 and $100,000 annually), lifetime overdose experience, having ever used cocaine regularly, having ever been prescribed benzodiazepines, recent drug binging, and encouraging fellow drug users to use benzodiazepines to cope with opioid withdrawal were consistently strong predictors of regular nonmedical benzodiazepine use.ConclusionNonmedical benzodiazepine use may be common among nonmedical opioid users due to its drug-related multi-functionality. Harm reduction messages should account for the multiple functions benzodiazepines serve in a drug-using context, and encourage drug users to tailor their endorsement of benzodiazepines to peers to include safer alternatives.     

Prospective comparative assessment of buprenorphine overdose with heroin and methadone: Clinical characteristics and response to antidotal treatment

Buprenorphine is a partial opioid agonist with a “ceiling effect” for respiratory depression. Despite this, it has been associated with severe overdoses. Conflicting data exist regarding its response in overdose to naloxone. We compared clinical overdose characteristics of buprenorphine with heroin and methadone and assessed responses to naloxone and flumazenil. Patients admitted to two intensive care units with severe opioid overdoses were enrolled into this 4-year prospective study. Urine and blood toxicological screening were performed to identify overdoses involving predominantly buprenorphine, heroin, or methadone. Eighty-four patients with heroin (n = 26), buprenorphine (n = 39), or methadone (n = 19) overdoses were analyzed. In the buprenorphine group, sedative drug coingestions were frequent (95%), whereas in the methadone group, suicide attempts were significantly more often reported (p = .0007). Buprenorphine overdose induced an opioid syndrome not differing significantly from heroin and methadone in mental status (as measured by Glasgow Coma Score) or arterial blood gases. Mental status depression was not reversed in buprenorphine overdoses with naloxone (0.4–0.8 mg) but did improve with flumazenil (0.2–1 mg) if benzodiazepines were coingested. In conclusion, buprenorphine overdose causes an opioid syndrome clinically indistinguishable from heroin and methadone. Although mental status and respiratory depression are often unresponsive to low-dose naloxone, flumazenil may be effective in buprenorphine overdoses involving benzodiazepines.     

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.