Search

Objectives: Emergency Medical Services patients who survive overdose are at high risk for subsequent overdose and death. Programs that seek to link overdose survivors to harm reduction and treatment services are increasingly common, though they vary in design and measured effect. Public Health - Seattle & King County (PHSKC) used a continuous quality improvement (CQI) process to assess and improve a phone-based model for post-overdose outreach in King County, Washington., Methods: King County Emergency Medical Services (KC-EMS) health records are queried weekly to identify suspected opioid overdose and other drug-related encounters. Patients treated by KC-EMS that met outreach eligibility criteria were contacted by phone and offered referrals to local services. Three Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were sequentially implemented to iteratively assess program indicators and implement program adaptations. The PDSA cycles varied in terms of eligibility criteria, outreach modality, and level of resources devoted to phone number searches. Program indicators and corresponding costs were measured for each phase and calculated per month, per eligible patient, and per patient referred to services., Results: During the initial call-based outreach pilot, the fewest number of patients met eligibility criteria (monthly average =39) and were referred to services (monthly average =2). In Phase Two, outreach shifted to automated texting and eligibility criteria expanded, resulting in an increase in the monthly average number of eligible patients (monthly average =137) and patients referred to services (monthly average =3). Phase Three adaptations expanded eligibility criteria further but limited outreach to patients with a phone number documented in their KC-EMS record, resulting in an average of 405 eligible patients per month and four patients that were referred to services. The costs per patient referred to services changed from $454 in Phase one to $589 in Phase Two to $279 in Phase Three., Conclusions: The PDSA process helped PHSKC's post-overdose outreach team identify adaptations to improve the efficiency of the post-overdose outreach program. The number of people referred to services was modest, reflecting the challenges of post-incident phone-based outreach. Our experience highlights the value of incorporating CQI processes in ongoing program operations and the need for a multi-pronged overdose prevention strategy.

Although non-Hispanic American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) persons account for 0.7% of the U.S. population,* a recent analysis reported that 1.3% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases reported to CDC with known race and ethnicity were among AI/AN persons (1). To assess the impact of COVID-19 among the AI/AN population, reports of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases during January 22 † -July 3, 2020 were analyzed. The analysis was limited to 23 states § with >70% complete race/ethnicity information and five or more laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases among both AI/AN persons (alone or in combination with other races and ethnicities) and non-Hispanic white (white) persons. Among 424,899 COVID-19 cases reported by these states, 340,059 (80%) had complete race/ethnicity information; among these 340,059 cases, 9,072 (2.7%) occurred among AI/AN persons, and 138,960 (40.9%) among white persons. Among 340,059 cases with complete patient race/ethnicity data, the cumulative incidence among AI/AN persons in these 23 states was 594 per 100,000 AI/AN population (95% confidence interval [CI] = 203-1,740), compared with 169 per 100,000 white population (95% CI = 137-209) (rate ratio [RR] = 3.5; 95% CI = 1.2-10.1). AI/AN persons with COVID-19 were younger (median age = 40 years; interquartile range [IQR] = 26-56 years) than were white persons (median age = 51 years; IQR = 32-67 years). More complete case report data and timely, culturally responsive, and evidence-based public health efforts that leverage the strengths of AI/AN communities are needed to decrease COVID-19 transmission and improve patient outcomes., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.