Search

Introduction: Bystander provision of naloxone is a key modality to reduce opioid overdose-related death. Naloxone training courses are available, but no standardized program exists. As part of a bystander empowerment course, we created and evaluated a brief naloxone training module.Methods: This was a retrospective evaluation of a naloxone training course, which was paired with Stop the Bleed training for hemorrhage control and was offered to administrative staff in an office building. Participants worked in an organization related to healthcare, but none were clinicians. The curriculum included the following topics: 1) background about the opioid epidemic; 2) how to recognize the signs of an opioid overdose; 3) actions not to take when encountering an overdose victim; 4) the correct steps to take when encountering an overdose victim; 5) an overview of naloxone products; and 6) Good Samaritan protection laws. The 20-minute didactic section was followed by a hands-on session with nasal naloxone kits and a simulation mannequin. The course was evaluated with the Opioid Overdose Knowledge (OOKS) and Opioid Overdose Attitudes (OOAS) scales for take-home naloxone training evaluation. We used the paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test to compare scores pre- and post-course.Results: Twenty-eight participants completed the course. The OOKS, measuring objective knowledge about opioid overdose and naloxone, had improved scores from a median of 73.2% (interquartile range [IQR] 68.3%–79.9%) to 91.5% (IQR 85.4%–95.1%), P < 0.001. The three domains on the OOAS score also showed statistically significant results. Competency to manage an overdose improved on a five-point scale from a median of 2.5 (IQR 2.4–2.9) to a median of 3.7 (IQR 3.5–4.1), P < 0.001. Concerns about managing an overdose decreased (improved) from a median of 2.3 (IQR 1.9–2.6) to median 1.8 (IQR 1.5–2.1), P < 0.001. Readiness to intervene in an opioid overdose improved from a median of 4 (IQR 3.8–4.2) to a median of 4.2 (IQR 4–4.2), P < 0.001.Conclusion: A brief course designed to teach bystanders about opioid overdose and naloxone was feasible and effective. We encourage hospitals and other organizations to use and promulgate this model. Furthermore, we suggest the convening of a national consortium to achieve consensus on program content and delivery.

Prescription drug abuse is a leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are a popular initiative among policy makers and a key tool to combat the prescription drug epidemic. This editorial discusses the limitations of PDMPs, future approaches needed to improve the effectiveness of PDMPs, and other approaches essential to curbing the rise of drug abuse and overdose. [West J Emerg Med. 2015;16(1):67–70.]

Introduction: Tablet computer-based screening may have the potential for detecting patients at risk for opioid abuse in the emergency department (ED). Study objectives were a) to determine if the revised Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP®-R), a 24-question previously paper-based screening tool for opioid abuse potential, could be administered on a tablet computer to an ED patient population; b) to demonstrate that >90% of patients can complete the electronic screener without assistance in 35 years. One hundred percent of subjects completed the screener. Median time to completion was 148 (interquartile range 117.5-184.3) seconds, and 95% (n=78) completed in

Introduction: Emergency department (ED) visits related to opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased nearly twofold over the last decade. Treatment with buprenorphine has been demonstrated to decrease opioid-related overdose deaths. In this study, we aimed to better understand ED clinicians’ attitudes toward the initiation of buprenorphine treatment in the ED.Methods: We performed a mixed-methods study consisting of a survey of 174 ED clinicians (attending physicians, residents, and physician assistants) and semi-structured interviews with 17 attending emergency physicians at a tertiary-care academic hospital.Results: A total of 93 ED clinicians (53% of those contacted) completed the survey. While 80% of respondents agreed that buprenorphine should be administered in the ED for patients requesting treatment, only 44% felt that they were prepared to discuss medication for addiction treatment. Compared to clinicians with fewer than five years of practice, those with greater experience were less likely to approve of ED-initiated buprenorphine. In our qualitative analysis, physicians had differing perspectives on the role that the ED should play in treating OUD. Most physicians felt that a buprenorphine-based intervention in the ED would be feasible with institutional support, including training opportunities, protocol support within the electronic health record, counseling and support staff, and a robust referral system for outpatient follow-up.Conclusion: ED clinicians’ perception of buprenorphine varied by years of practice and training level. Most ED clinicians did not feel prepared to initiate buprenorphine in the ED. Qualitative interviews identified several addressable barriers to ED-initiated buprenorphine.

As the consequences of liberal opioid prescribing have become apparent, efforts to address the role of the health care system in supporting more  balanced opioid use and the prevention and treatment of opioid use disorder have increased. Developing a unified and multidisciplinary approach can lead to an integrated care model that emphasizes primary prevention, harm reduction, and transition to life-sustaining treatment while also maintaining attentiveness to effective pain management. A model for this, which follows the nomenclature in proscribing antimicrobial use, is the development of an opioid stewardship program. Such programs allow for the integration of diverse perspectives and new mandates and uses a patient-centered approach with an iterative evaluation process. We describe a group of adoptable efforts that have been utilized successfully at our institutions and may be adapted and optimized to the needs and resources of other hospitals and health care systems.

Introduction: Screening of patients for opioid risk has been recommended prior to opioid prescribing. Opioids are prescribed frequently in the emergency department (ED) setting, but screening tools are often of significant length and therefore limited in their utility. We describe and evaluate three approaches to shortening a screening tool: creation of a short form; curtailment; and stochastic curtailment.Methods: To demonstrate the various shortening techniques, this retrospective study used data from two studies of ED patients for whom the provider was considering providing an opioid prescription and who completed the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain-Revised, a 24-item assessment. High-risk criteria from patients’ prescription drug monitoring program data were used as an endpoint. Using real-data simulation, we determined the sensitivity, specificity, and test length of each shortening technique.Results: We included data from 188 ED patients. The original screener had a test length of 24 questions, a sensitivity of 44% and a specificity of 76%. The 12-question short form had a sensitivity of 41% and specificity of 75%. Curtailment and stochastic curtailment reduced the question length (mean test length ranging from 8.1-19.7 questions) with no reduction in sensitivity or specificity.Conclusion: In an ED population completing computer-based screening, the techniques of curtailment and stochastic curtailment markedly reduced the screening tool’s length but had no effect on test characteristics. These techniques can be applied to improve efficiency of screening patients in the busy ED environment without sacrificing sensitivity or specificity.

Introduction: The epidemic of opioid use disorder and opioid overdose carries extensive morbidity and mortality and necessitates a multi-pronged, community-level response. Bystander administration of the opioid overdose antidote naloxone is effective, but it is not universally available and requires consistent effort on the part of citizens to proactively carry naloxone. An alternate approach would be to position naloxone kits where they are most needed in a community, in a manner analogous to automated external defibrillators. We hypothesized that opioid overdoses would show geospatial clustering within a community, leading to potential target sites for such publicly deployed naloxone (PDN).Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of 700 emergency medical service (EMS) runs that involved opioid overdose or naloxone administration in Cambridge, Massachusetts, between 10/16/2016 and 05/10/2017. We used geospatial analysis to examine for clustering in general, and to identify specific clusters amenable to PDN sites.Results: Opioid-related EMS runs in Cambridge, MA, exhibit significant geospatial clustering, and we identified three clusters of opioid-related EMS runs in Cambridge with distinct characteristics. Models of PDN sites at these clusters show that approximately 40% of all opioid-related EMS runs in Cambridge, MA, would be accessible within 200 meters of PDN sites placed at cluster centroids.Conclusion: Identifying clusters of opioid-related EMS runs within a community may help to improve community coverage of naloxone, and strongly suggests that PDN could be a useful adjunct to bystander-administered naloxone in stemming the tide of opioid-related death.

Physicians generally recommend that patients resuscitated with naloxone after opioid overdose stay in the emergency department for a period of observation in order to prevent harm from delayed sequelae of opioid toxicity. Patients frequently refuse this period of observation despiteenefit to risk. Healthcare providers are thus confronted with the challenge of how best to protect the patient's interests while also respecting autonomy, including assessing whether the patient is making an autonomous choice to refuse care. Previous studies have shown that physicians have widely divergent approaches to navigating these conflicts. This paper reviews what is known about the effects of opioid use disorder on decision-making, and argues that some subset of these refusals are non-autonomous choices, even when patients appear to have decision making capacity. This conclusion has several implications for how physicians assess and respond to patients refusing medical recommendations after naloxone resuscitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Tablet computer-based screening may have the potential for detecting patients at risk for opioid abuse in the emergency department (ED). Study objectives were a) to determine if the revised Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP®-R), a 24-question previously paper-based screening tool for opioid abuse potential, could be administered on a tablet computer to an ED patient population; b) to demonstrate that >90% of patients can complete the electronic screener without assistance in 35 years. One hundred percent of subjects completed the screener. Median time to completion was 148 (interquartile range 117.5-184.3) seconds, and 95% (n=78) completed in

Advertising emergency department (ED) wait times has become a common practice in the United States. Proponents of this practice state that it is a powerful marketing strategy that can help steer patients to the ED. Opponents worry about the risk to the public health that arises from a patient with an emergent condition self-triaging to a further hospital, problems with inaccuracy and lack of standard definition of the reported time, and directing lower acuity patients to the higher cost ED setting instead to primary care. Three sample cases demonstrating the pitfalls of advertising ED wait times are discussed. Given the lack of rigorous evidence supporting the practice and potential adverse effects to the public health, caution about its use is advised. [West J Emerg Med 2013;14(2):77-78.]