Search

Overdose mortality from illicit and prescription opioids has reached epidemic proportions in the United States, especially in rural areas. Naloxone is a safe and effective agent that has been shown to successfully reverse the effects of opioid overdose in the prehospital setting. The National EMS Scope of Practice Model currently only recommends advanced life support (ALS) providers to administer naloxone; however, some individual states have expanded this scope of practice to include intranasal (IN) administration of naloxone by basic life support (BLS) providers, including the Northern New England states. This study compares the effectiveness and appropriateness of naloxone administration between BLS and ALS providers.All Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine EMS patient encounters between April 1, 2014 and December 31, 2016 where naloxone was administered were examined and 3,219 patients were identified. The proportion of successful reversals of opioid overdose, based on improvement in the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), respiratory rate (RR), and provider global assessment (GA) of response to medication was compared between BLS and ALS providers using a Chi-Squared statistic, Fisher's exact or Wilcoxon rank-sum test.There was no significant difference in the percent improvement in GCS between BLS and ALS (64% and 64% P = 0.94). There was no significant difference in the percentage of improvement in RR between BLS and ALS (45% and 48% P = 0.43). There was a significant difference in the percentage of improvement of GA between BLS and ALS (80% and 67% P0.001). There was no significant difference in determining appropriate cases to administer naloxone where RR12 and GCS15 between BLS and ALS (42% and 43% P = 0.94).BLS providers were as effective as ALS providers in improving patient outcome measures after naloxone administration and in identifying patients for whom administration of naloxone is appropriate. These findings support expanding the National EMS Scope of Practice Model to include BLS administration of intranasal naloxone for suspected opioid overdoses.

iNKT cells and mast cells have both been implicated in the syndrome of allergic asthma through their activation-induced release of Th2 type cytokines and secretion of histamine and other mediators, respectively, which can promote airways hyperresponsiveness (AHR) to agents such as methacholine. However, a mechanistic link between iNKT cells and mast cell recruitment or activation has never been explored. Our objective was to determine whether iNKT cells are necessary for the recruitment of mast cells and if iNKT cells can influence the acute allergen induced bronchoconstriction (AIB) caused by mast cell mediator release. To do so, we pharmacologically eliminated iNKT cells using a specific antibody (NKT-14) and examined its impact on airway inflammation and physiological phenotype. In mice treated with NKT-14, the elimination of iNKT cells was sufficient to prevent AHR and pulmonary eosinophilic inflammation elicited by administration of the iNKT cell agonist, αGalCer. In mice treated with NKT-14 and then sensitized and challenged with house dust mite extract (HDM), eliminating the iNKT cells significantly reduced both AHR and AIB but did not affect pulmonary inflammation, the mast cell population, nor the release of the mast cell mediators mast cell protease-1 and prostaglandin D2. We conclude that while iNKT cells contribute to the phenotype of allergic airways disease through the manifestation of AIB and AHR, their presence is not required for mast cell recruitment and activation, or to generate the characteristic inflammatory response subsequent to allergen challenge.