The changing epidemiology of opioid overdose in Baltimore,Maryland, 2012–2017: insights from emergency medical services

IntroductionAn estimated 100,306 people died from an overdose from May 2020 to April 2021. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) are often the first responder to opioid overdose, and EMS encounter records can provide granular epidemiologic data on opioid overdose. This study describes the demographic, temporal, and geographic epidemiology of suspected opioid overdose in Baltimore City using data from Baltimore City Fire Department EMS encounters with the administration of the opioid antagonist naloxone.MethodThe present analyses used patient encounter data from 2012 to 2017 from the Baltimore City Fire Department, the city’s primary provider of EMS services. The analytic sample included patient encounters within the city that involved naloxone administration to patients 15 years of age or older (n = 20,592). Negative binomial regression was used to calculate the incidence rates based on demographic characteristics, year, and census tract. Choropleth maps were used to show the geographic distribution of overdose incidence across census tracts in 2013, 2015, and 2017.ResultsFrom 2012 to 2017, the annual number of EMS encounters with naloxone administrations approximately doubled every 2 years, and the temporal pattern of naloxone administration was similar to the pattern of fatal opioid-related overdoses. For most census tracts, incidence rates significantly increased over time. Population-based incidence of naloxone administration varied significantly by socio-demographic characteristics. Males, non-whites, and those 25–69 years of age had the highest incidence rates.ConclusionThe incidence of naloxone administration increased dramatically over the study period. Despite significant cross-sectional variation in incidence across demographically and geographically defined groups, there were significant proportional increases in incidence rates, consistent with fatal overdose rates over the period. This study demonstrated the value of EMS data for understanding the local epidemiology of opioid-related overdose.

Key Messages

• Patterns of EMS encounters with naloxone administration appear to be an excellent proxy for patterns of opioid-related overdoses based on the consistency of fatal overdose rates over time.
• EMS plays a central role in preventing fatal opioid-related overdoses through the administration of naloxone, provision of other emergency services, and transportation to medical facilities.
• EMS encounters with naloxone administration could also be used to evaluate the impact of overdose prevention interventions and public health services.

     

Feasibility of Bystander Administration of Public-Access Naloxone for Opioid Overdose

Objective: Pre-stationing naloxone, a competitive antagonist that can reverse the effects of opioid overdose, in public spaces may expedite antidote delivery. Our study aimed to determine the feasibility of bystander-assisted overdose treatment using pre-stationed naloxone. Methods: Convenience sample of bystanders in Cambridge, Massachusetts in April 2017. Subjects assisted a simulated patient described as unconscious. Subjects interacted with simulated EMS dispatch to locate a nearby box, unlock it, and administer naloxone. Results: Fifty participants completed the simulation. Median time from simulated ambulance dispatch to naloxone administration was 189 seconds, and from arrival at patient side to administration 61 seconds. All but one participant (98.0%) correctly administered naloxone. Subjects' comfort with administration and willingness to provide medical care increased from before to after the trial. Comfort in administering naloxone varied significantly with level of previous training prior to, but not following, study participation. Conclusions: Bystanders are willing and able to access pre-stationed naloxone and administer it to a simulated patient in a public space. Public access naloxone stations may be a useful tool to reduce time to naloxone administration, particularly in areas where opioid overdoses are clustered.     

Out-of-hospital Treatment of Opioid Overdoses in an Urban Setting

Objectives : To investigate clinical outcomes in a cohort of opioid overdose patients treated in an out-of-hospital urban setting noted for a high prevalence of IV opioid use. Methods : A retrospective review was performed of presumed opioid overdoses that were managed in 1993 by the emergency medical services (EMS) system in a single-tiered, urban advanced life support (ALS) EMS system. Specifically. all patients administered naloxone by the county paramedics were reviewed. Those patients with at least 3 of 5 objective criteria of an opioid overdose [respiratory rate <6/min, pinpoint pupils, evidence of IV drug use, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score <12, or cyanosis] were included. A response to naloxone was defined as improvement to a GCS 14 and a respiratory rate 10/min within 5 minutes of naloxone administration. ED dispositions of opioid-overdose patients brought to the county hospital were reviewed. All medical examiner's cases deemed to be opioid-overdose-related deaths by postmortem toxicologic levels also were reviewed. Results : There were 726 patients identified with presumed opioid overdoses. Most patients (609/726, 85.4%) had an initial pulse and blood pressure (BP). Most (94%) of this group responded to naloxone and all were transported. Of the remainder, 101 (14%) had obvious signs of death and 16 (2.2%) were in cardiopulmonary arrest without obvious signs of death. Of the patients in full arrest, 2 had return of spontaneous circulation but neither survived. Of the 609 patients who had initial BPs, 487 (80%) received naloxone IM (plus bag-valve-mask ventilation) and 122 (20%) received the drug IV. Responses to naloxone were similar; 94% IM vs 90% IV. Of 443 patients transported to the county hospital, 12 (2.7%) were admitted. The admitted patients had noncardiogenic pulmonary edema (n = 4). pneumonia (n = 2), other infections (n = 2), persistent respiratory depression (n = 2). and persistent alteration in mental status (n = 2). The patients with pulmonary edema were clinically obvious upon ED arrival. Hypotension was never noted and bradycardia was seen in only 2% of our presumed-opioid:overdose population. Conclusions : The majority of the opioid-overdose patients who had initial BPs responded readily to naloxone, with few patients requiring admission. Noncardiogenic pulmonary edema was uncommon and when present, hypoxia was evident upon arrival to the ED. Naloxone administered IM in conjunction with bag-valve-mask ventilation was effective in this patient population. The opioid-overdose patients in cardiopulmonary arrest did not survive.     

Police Officers Can Safely and Effectively Administer Intranasal Naloxone

Introduction: Opioid overdose rates continue to rise at an alarming rate. One method used to combat this epidemic is the administration of naloxone by law enforcement. Many cities have implemented police naloxone administration programs, but there is a minimal amount of research examining this policy. The following study examines data over 18 months, after implementation of a police naloxone program in an urban setting. We describe the most common indications and outcomes of naloxone administration as well as examine the incidence of arrest, immediate detention, or voluntary transport to the hospital. In doing so, this study seeks to describe the clinical factors surrounding police use of naloxone, and the effects of police administration. Methods: All police officer administrations were queried from April 2014 through September 2015 (n = 126). For each incident we collected the indication, response, and disposition of the patient that was recorded on a “sick-injured civilian” report that officers were required to complete after administration of naloxone. All of the relevant information was abstracted from this report into an electronic data collection form that was then input into SPSS for analysis. Results: The most common indication for administration was unconscious/unresponsive (n = 117; 92.9%) followed by slowed breathing (n = 72; 57.1%), appeared blue (n = 63; 50.0%) and not breathing (n = 41; 32.5%). After administration of naloxone the majority of patients regained consciousness (n = 82; 65.1%) followed by began to breath (n = 71; 56.3%). However, in 17.5% (n = 22) of the cases “Nothing” happened when naloxone was administered. The majority of patients were transported voluntarily to the hospital (n = 122; 96.8%). Lastly, there was only one report where the patient became combative. Conclusion: Our study shows that police officers trained in naloxone administration can correctly recognize symptoms of opioid overdose, and can appropriately administer naloxone without significant adverse effects or outcomes. Furthermore, the administration of police naloxone does not result in a significant incidence of combativeness or need for scene escalations such as immediate detention. Further research is needed to investigate the impact of police naloxone; specifically, comparing outcomes of police delivery to EMS alone, as well as the impact on rural opioid overdoses.     

Early Discharge of Patients with Presumed Opioid Overdose: Development of a Clinical Prediction Rule

OBJECTIVE: To develop a clinical prediction rule to identify patients who can be safely discharged one hour after the administration of naloxone for presumed opioid overdose. METHODS: Patients who received naloxone for known or presumed opioid overdose were formally evaluated one hour later for multiple potential predictor variables. Patients were classified into two groups: those with adverse events within 24 hours and those without. Using classification and regression tree methodology, a decision rule was developed to predict safe discharge. RESULTS: Clinical findings from 573 patients allowed us to develop a clinical prediction rule with a sensitivity of 99% (95% CI = 96% to 100%) and a specificity of 40% (95% CI = 36% to 45%). Patients with presumed opioid overdose can be safely discharged one hour after naloxone administration if they: 1) can mobilize as usual; 2) have oxygen saturation on room air of >92%; 3) have a respiratory rate >10 breaths/min and <20 breaths/min; 4) have a temperature of >35.0 degrees C and <37.5 degrees C; 5) have a heart rate >50 beats/min and <100 beats/min; and 6) have a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15. CONCLUSIONS: This prediction rule for safe early discharge of patients with presumed opioid overdose performs well in this derivation set but requires validation followed by confirmation of safe implementation.     

Naloxone Use in a Tiered-Response Emergency Medical Services System

Objective. To examine the delivery andeffect of naloxone for opioid overdose in a tiered-response emergency medical services (EMS) system andto ascertain how much time could be saved if the first arriving emergency medical technicians (EMTs) could have administered intranasal naloxone. Methods. This was case series of all EMS-treated overdose patients who received naloxone by paramedics in a two-tiered EMS system during 2004. The system dispatches basic life support–trained fire fighter–EMTs and/or advanced life support–trained paramedics depending on the severity of cases. Main outcomes were geographic distribution of naloxone-treated overdose, severity of cases, response to naloxone, andtime interval between arrival of EMTs andarrival of paramedics at the scene. Results. There were 164 patients who received naloxone for suspected overdose. There were 75 patients (46%) initially unresponsive to painful stimulus. Respiratory rate was <10 breaths/min in 79 (48%). Death occurred in 36 (22%) at the scene or during transport. A full or partial response to naloxone occurred in 119 (73%). Recognized adverse reactions were limited to agitation/combativeness in 25 (15%) andemesis in six (4%). Average EMT arrival time was 5.9 minutes. Average paramedic arrival time was 11.6 minutes in most cases and16.1 minutes in 46 cases (28%) in which paramedics were requested by EMTs at the scene. Conclusions. There is potential for significantly earlier delivery of naloxone to patients in opioid overdose if EMTs could deliver intranasal naloxone. A pilot study training andauthorizing EMTs to administer intranasal naloxone in suspected opioid overdose is warranted.     

Efficacy of intranasal naloxone as a needleless alternative for treatment of opioid overdose in the prehospital setting

Prehospital providers are at increased risk for blood-borne exposure and disease due to the nature of their environment. The use if intranasal (i.n.) medications in high-risk populations may limit this risk of exposure. To determine the efficacy of i.n. naloxone in the treatment of suspected opiate overdose patients in the prehospital setting, a prospective, nonrandomized trial of administering i.n. naloxone by paramedics to patients with suspected opiate overdoses over a 6-month period was performed. All adult patients encountered in the prehospital setting as suspected opiate overdose (OD), found down (FD), or with altered mental status (AMS) who met the criteria for naloxone administration were included in the study. i.n. naloxone (2 mg) was administered immediately upon patient contact and before i.v. insertion and administration of i.v. naloxone (2 mg). Patients were then treated by EMS protocol. The main outcome measures were: time of i.n. naloxone administration, time of i.v. naloxone administration, time of appropriate patient response as reported by paramedics. Ninety-five patients received i.n. naloxone and were included in the study. A total of 52 patients responded to naloxone by either i.n. or i.v., with 43 (83%) responding to i.n. naloxone alone. Seven patients (16%) in this group required further doses of i.v. naloxone. In conclusion, i.n. naloxone is a novel alternative method for drug administration in high-risk patients in the prehospital setting with good overall effectiveness. The use of this route is further discussed in relation to efficacy of treatment and minimizing the risk of blood-borne exposures to EMS personnel.     

Do heroin overdose patients require observation after receiving naloxone?

Context: Heroin use in the US has exploded in recent years, and heroin overdoses requiring naloxone are very common. After awakening, some heroin users refuse further treatment or transport to the hospital. These patients may be at risk for recurrent respiratory depression or pulmonary edema. In those transported to the emergency department, the duration of the observation period is controversial. Additionally, non-medical first responders and lay bystanders can administer naloxone for heroin and opioid overdoses. There are concerns about the outcomes and safety of this practice as well.

Objectives: To search the medical literature related to the following questions: (1) What are the medical risks to a heroin user who refuses ambulance transport after naloxone? (2) If the heroin user is treated in the emergency department with naloxone, how long must they be observed prior to discharge? (3) How effective in heroin users is naloxone administered by first responders and bystanders? Are there risks associated with naloxone distribution programs?

Methods: We searched PubMed and GoogleScholar with search terms related to each of the questions listed above. The search was limited to English language and excluded patents and citations. The search was last updated on September 31, 2016. The articles found were reviewed for relevance to our objective questions. Eight out of 1020 citations were relevant to the first 2 questions, 5 of 707 were relevant to the third question and 15 of 287 were relevant to the fourth question. In the prehospital environment, does a heroin user revived with naloxone always require ambulance transport and what are the medical risks if ambulance transport is refused after naloxone? The eight articles were all observational studies done either prospectively or retrospectively. Two studies focused on heroin overdoses and included 1069 patients not transported to the hospital. No deaths occurred in this group. In counting the patients from all eight studies, some of which included non-heroin opioid overdoses, there were 5443 patients treated without transport and four deaths from rebound opioid toxicity. The number needed to transport to save one life (NNT) is 1361. Adverse effects were mostly related to opioid withdrawal. If a heroin user is treated in the ED, how long must the patient stay under observation before being safe for discharge? Five articles addressing the duration of ED observation required for patients treated with naloxone for opioid overdoses. Although a wide range of observation durations were reported, one study supported observing patients for one hour. If after this period the patient mobilizes as usual, has normal vital signs, and a Glasgow Coma Scale of 15, they can be discharged safely. What are the likely risks in heroin users following naloxone use by lay bystanders or first responders? Of the 15 relevant papers, a systematic review reported a 100% survival rate in eleven studies and a range of 96–99% survival in the remaining four. Two other studies suffered from poor follow-up and had lower success rates of 83% and 89%. Few if any risks were associated with opioid overdose prevention programs in which lay people were trained to administer naloxone.

Conclusions: Patients revived with naloxone after heroin overdose may be safely released without transport to the hospital if they have normal mentation and vital signs. In the absence of co-intoxicants and further opioid use there is very low risk of death from rebound opioid toxicity. For those patients treated in the ED for opioid overdose, an observation period of one hour is sufficient if they ambulate as usual, have normal vital signs and a Glasgow Coma Scale of 15. Patients suffering opioid toxicity can be administered naloxone safely by first responders and trained lay people. Programs that train these individuals are likely safe and beneficial, however further research is necessary.     

Narcotic use in the hospital: reasonably safe?

OBJECTIVE: To determine the causes and frequency of overdoses associated with the administration of opioid analgesics in hospitalized patients. DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: Two acute care teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Eighty-one hospitalized patients who received naloxone for a clinically suspected narcotic overdose. INTERVENTIONS: Three investigators reviewed each patient who received naloxone during a 12-month period. The patients were judged to have a narcotic overdose if caregivers documented an immediate improvement in mental status, respiratory rate, or blood pressure after naloxone administration. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The number and causes of narcotic overdoses were determined. The frequency of morphine and meperidine overdoses was calculated. The number of incidents reported using incident or adverse drug reaction reports or the appropriate International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) code. RESULTS: In the 22 overdoses that occurred, 14 (64 percent) were caused by medication prescribing, compounding, or administration errors and potentially were preventable. The remaining eight patients experienced an overdose despite receiving appropriate amounts of opioids. The frequency of overdoses was 0.4 and 0.2 percent of total patients receiving morphine or meperidine, respectively, at the two hospitals. Nonreporting of these narcotic overdoses was frequent. In one hospital, 1 incident report and 3 adverse drug reactions were reported for 17 overdoses. At the second hospital, 1 incident report and 1 adverse drug reaction were reported for 6 overdoses. None of the patient charts included an ICD-9-CM code that documented the problem. CONCLUSIONS: The causes of overdoses are not limited to prescribing and administration errors. Some patients, despite proper execution of appropriate orders, develop a narcotic overdose. Caregivers must be aware of this problem and monitor patients for a decrease in mental status and respiratory rate. In addition, we conclude that an important number of hospitalized patients develop an overdose even though the frequency is low related to the number of patients receiving narcotics.     

Are heroin overdose deaths related to patient release after prehospital treatment with naloxone?

Objective. Naloxone is frequently used by prehospital care providers to treat suspected heroin and opioid overdoses. The authors' EMS system has operated a policy of allowing these patients, once successfully treated, to sign out against medical advice (AMA) in the field. This study was performed to evaluate the safety of this practice. Methods. The authors retrospectively reviewed all 1996 San Diego County Medical Examiner's (ME'S) cases in which opioid overdoses contributed to the cause of death. The records of all patients who were found dead in public or private residences or died in emergency departments of reasons other than natural causes or progression of disease, are forwarded to the ME office. ME cases associated with opiate use as a cause of death were cross-compared with all patients who received naloxone by field paramedics and then refused transport. The charts were reviewed by dates, times, age, sex, location, and, when available, ethnicity. Results. There were 117 ME cases of opiate overdose deaths and 317 prehospital patients who received naloxone and refused further treatment. When compared by age, time, date, sex, location, and ethnicity, there was no case in which a patient was treated by paramedics with naloxone within 12 hours of being found dead of an opiate overdose. Conclusions. Giving naloxone to heroin overdoses in the field and then allowing the patients to sign out AMA resulted in no death in the one-year period studied. This study did not evaluate for return visits by paramedics nor whether patients were later taken to hospitals by private vehicles.     

Opioid Overdose Prevention Training for Health Care Teams in Underserved Communities

As opioid-related overdose deaths increase across the nation, the need for opioid and naloxone education is of the utmost importance. The metropolitan Chicago area is one of the hardest hit regions regarding opioid use and overdoses. This report focuses on advanced practice nurses’ efforts to provide opioid education and naloxone training to a network of primary care clinics in underserved communities surrounding downtown Chicago. Postsurvey data revealed positive results, showing an increased awareness regarding the opioid crisis and naloxone administration. Utilizing advanced practice nursing skillsets poses as an optimal opportunity to educate interdisciplinary teams, which can positively influence patient outcomes.     

Multiple Naloxone Administrations Among Emergency Medical Service Providers is Increasing

Background: Opioid overdoses are at epidemic levels in the United States. Emergency Medical Service (EMS) providers may administer naloxone to restore patient breathing and prevent respiratory arrest. There was a need for contemporary data to examine the number of naloxone administrations in an EMS encounter. Methods: Using data from the National Emergency Medical Services Information System, we examined data from 2012–5 to determine trends in patients receiving multiple naloxone administrations (MNAs). Logistic regression including demographic, clinical, and operational information was used to examine factors associated with MNA. Results: Among all events where naloxone was administered only 16.7% of the 911 calls specifically identified the medical emergency as a drug ingestion or poisoning event. The percentage of patients receiving MNA increased from 14.5% in 2012 to 18.2% in 2015, which represents a 26% increase in MNA in 4 years. Patients aged 20–29 had the highest percentage of MNA (21.1%). Patients in the Northeast and the Midwest had the highest relative MNA (Chi Squared = 539.5, p < 0.01 and Chi Squared = 351.2, p < 0.01, respectively). The logistic regression model showed that the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for MNA were greatest among people who live in the Northeast (aOR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.13–1.22) and for men (aOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.10–1.16), but lower for suburban and rural areas (aOR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.72–0.80 and aOR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.80–0.89) and lowest for wilderness areas (aOR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.68–0.84). Higher adjusted odds of MNA occurred when an advanced life support (ALS 2) level of service was provided compared to basic life support (BLS) ambulances (aOR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.45–3.16) and when the dispatch complaint indicated there was a drug poisoning event (aOR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.09–1.16). Reported layperson naloxone administration prior to EMS arrival was rare (1%). Conclusion: This study shows that frequency of MNA is growing over time and is regionally dependent. MNA may be a barometer of the potency of the opioid involved in the overdose. The increase in MNA provides support for a dosage review. Better identification of opioid related events in the dispatch system could lead to a better match of services with patient needs.     

Wooden chest syndrome: Beware of opioid antagonists,not just agonists

BackgroundIn a constantly increasing world of opioid addiction, naloxone has become a topic of great discussion and use. With seemingly minimal side effects, naloxone has become one of the most wellknown and widely used reversal agents for opioid intoxication. While more common effects of using naloxone include agitation, abdominal cramps, piloerection, diarrhea, nausea, and yawning, lesser known side effects involve muscle spasms, flushing, hyperreflexia in neonates, and seizures. This case study demonstrates a side effect of rigidity secondary to IV naloxone that has not previously been documented.CaseA 56 year old man was brought in by EMS after being found unresponsive in a car with a bag of drugs beside him. He was given 0.5 mg naloxone IV by EMS and immediately brought to the hospital. On arrival, the pt was noted to have tight rigidity of his upper extremities, with severe flexion. This presentation was not noted before the delivery of naloxone by EMS.ConclusionsWhile this case highlights a patient with a rare side effect of naloxone, it reminds physicians that all medications come with a cost. Of course, ABCs remain the highest priority of resuscitation, however when administering a medication to reverse a drug overdose, it is important to keep in mind all possible consequences of said agent. Recognizing that complete muscle rigidity may remain a result of naloxone administration allows physicians to perhaps save patients from further medical workup.     

Intranasal Naloxone Is a Viable Alternative to Intravenous Naloxone for Prehospital Narcotic Overdose

Objective. To compare the prehospital time intervals from patient contact and medication administration to clinical response for intranasal (IN) versus intravenous (IV) naloxone in patients with suspected narcotic overdose. Methods. This was a retrospective review of emergency medical services (EMS) and hospital records, before and after implementation of a protocol for administration of intranasal naloxone by the Central California EMS Agency. We included patients with suspected narcotic overdose treated in the prehospital setting over 17 months, between March 2003 and July 2004. Paramedics documented dose, route of administration, and positive response times using an electronic record. Clinical response was defined as an increase in respiratory rate (breaths/min) or Glasgow Coma Scale score of at least 6. Main outcome variables included time from medication to clinical response and time from patient contact to clinical response. Secondary variables included numbers of doses administered and rescue doses given by an alternate route. Between-group comparisons were accomplished using t-tests and chi-square tests as appropriate. Results. One hundred fifty-four patients met the inclusion criteria, including 104 treated with IV and 50 treated with IN naloxone. Clinical response was noted in 33 (66%) and 58 (56%) of the IN and IV groups, respectively (p = 0.3). The mean time between naloxone administration and clinical response was longer for the IN group (12.9 vs. 8.1 min, p = 0.02). However, the mean times from patient contact to clinical response were not significantly different between the IN and IV groups (20.3 vs. 20.7 min, p = 0.9). More patients in the IN group received two doses of naloxone (34% vs. 18%, p = 0.05), and three patients in the IN group received a subsequent dose of IV or IM naloxone. Conclusions. The time from dose administration to clinical response for naloxone was longer for the IN route, but the overall time from patient contact to response was the same for the IV and IN routes. Given the difficulty and potential hazards in obtaining IV access in many patients with narcotic overdose, IN naloxone appears to be a useful and potentially safer alternative.     

Suspected opioid-related emergency medical services encounters in a rural state, 1997-2002

Introduction

News organizations and governmental agencies have reported substantial increases in the number of opioid-related overdose cases in recent years.

Objective

To describe the utilization of emergency medical services (EMS) for suspected opioid-related overdose cases in a rural state during the period 1997 through 2002.

Methods

Statewide EMS records were reviewed for 1997 through 2002. Data reviewed included prehospital diagnosis and medications given to all patients by prehospital providers. For cases with a prehospital diagnosis of poisoning or overdose, data reviewed included medications given to patients by prehospital providers, pupil size, and respiratory rate. All records were reviewed in a defined sequence.

Results

The study period encompassed 1,175,781 patient encounters. Poisoning or overdose patients accounted for 19,808 (1.7%) encounters. Naloxone was administered by the EMS provider to 2,668 (0.2%) patients. For all poisoning or overdose patients, 1,308 (6.6%) had miotic pupils, 450 (2.2%) had a respiratory rate of <12 breaths/min, and 1,569 (7.9%) received naloxone. During the investigation period, total EMS patient encounters increased 25%, while patients with a complaint of poisoning or overdose increased 47%. The incidences of EMS overdose patients with miotic pupils, respiratory rate <10 breaths/min, and naloxone administration increased 167%, 295%, and 154%, respectively.

Conclusion

In this rural state, prehospital patients with findings suspicious for opioid overdose disproportionately outpaced the growth of all EMS encounters as well as general overdose encounters during the defined investigation period.