Back to Search Start Over

Take-home naloxone administered in emergency settings: feasibility of intervention implementation in a cluster randomized trial

Authors :
Helen A. Snooks
Jenna K. Jones
Fiona B. Bell
Jonathon R. Benger
Sarah L. Black
Simon Dixon
Adrian Edwards
Helena Emery
Bridie A. Evans
Gordon W. Fuller
Steve Goodacre
Rebecca Hoskins
Jane Hughes
Ann John
Sasha Johnston
Matthew B. Jones
Chris R. Moore
Rakshita Parab
Richard Pilbery
Fiona C. Sampson
Alan Watkins
Source :
BMC Emergency Medicine, Vol 24, Iss 1, Pp 1-7 (2024)
Publication Year :
2024
Publisher :
BMC, 2024.

Abstract

Abstract Background Opioids kill more people than any other class of drug. Naloxone is an opioid antagonist which can be distributed in kits for peer administration. We assessed the feasibility of implementing a Take-home Naloxone (THN) intervention in emergency settings, as part of designing a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT). Methods We undertook a clustered RCT on sites pairing UK Emergency Departments (ED) and ambulance services. At intervention sites, we recruited emergency healthcare practitioners to supply THN to patients presenting with opioid overdose or related condition, with recruitment across 2019–2021. We assessed feasibility of intervention implementation against four predetermined progression criteria covering site sign up and staff training; identification of eligible patients; issue of THN kits and Serious Adverse Events. Results At two intervention sites, randomly selected from 4, 299/687 (43.5%) clinical staff were trained (ED1 = 107, AS1 = 121, ED2 = 25, AS2 = 46). Sixty THN kits were supplied to eligible patients (21.7%) (n: ED1 = 36, AS1 = 4, ED2 = 16, AS2 = 4). Across sites, kits were not issued to eligible patients on a further 164 occasions, with reasons reported including: staff forgot (n = 136), staff too busy (n = 15), and suspected intentional overdose (n = 3), no kit available (n = 2), already given by drugs nurse (n = 4), other (n = 4). Staff recorded 626 other patients as ineligible but considered for inclusion, with reasons listed as: patient admitted to hospital (n = 194), patient absconded (n = 161) already recruited (n = 64), uncooperative or abusive (n = 55), staff not trained (n = 43), reduced consciousness level (n = 41), lack of capacity (n = 35), patient in custody (n = 21), other (n = 12). No adverse events were reported. Conclusion Staff and patient recruitment were low and varied widely by site. This feasibility study did not meet progression criteria; a fully powered RCT is not planned. Trial Registration ISRCTN13232859 (Registered 16/02/2018).

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1471227X
Volume :
24
Issue :
1
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
BMC Emergency Medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.9c872a4d09564f608b17a7c781a8f19a
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-024-01061-3