Dataset Information

Opioid overdose rates and implementation of overdose education and nasal naloxone distribution in Massachusetts: interrupted time series analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate the impact of state supported overdose education and nasal naloxone distribution (OEND) programs on rates of opioid related death from overdose and acute care utilization in Massachusetts.

Design

Interrupted time series analysis of opioid related overdose death and acute care utilization rates from 2002 to 2009 comparing community-year strata with high and low rates of OEND implementation to those with no implementation.

Setting

19 Massachusetts communities (geographically distinct cities and towns) with at least five fatal opioid overdoses in each of the years 2004 to 2006.

Participants

OEND was implemented among opioid users at risk for overdose, social service agency staff, family, and friends of opioid users.

Intervention

OEND programs equipped people at risk for overdose and bystanders with nasal naloxone rescue kits and trained them how to prevent, recognize, and respond to an overdose by engaging emergency medical services, providing rescue breathing, and delivering naloxone.

Main outcome measures

Adjusted rate ratios for annual deaths related to opioid overdose and utilization of acute care hospitals.

Results

Among these communities, OEND programs trained 2912 potential bystanders who reported 327 rescues. Both community-year strata with 1-100 enrollments per 100,000 population (adjusted rate ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.91) and community-year strata with greater than 100 enrollments per 100,000 population (0.54, 0.39 to 0.76) had significantly reduced adjusted rate ratios compared with communities with no implementation. Differences in rates of acute care hospital utilization were not significant.

Conclusions

Opioid overdose death rates were reduced in communities where OEND was implemented. This study provides observational evidence that by training potential bystanders to prevent, recognize, and respond to opioid overdoses, OEND is an effective intervention.

SUBMITTER: Walley AY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4688551 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) is an effective public health intervention to reduce opioid overdose fatalities (McDonald and Strang, Addiction 111:1177-1187, 2016). However, we know little about OEND implementation outcomes (i.e., indicators of implementation success), specifically the fidelity of training delivery, and how these may relate to intervention outcomes (i.e., indicators of the success or effectiveness of an intervention), such as overdose knowledge and attitudes. This study evaluated 16 OEND trainings conducted at different Opioid Overdose Prevention Programs in New York City. Trainees (N = 75) completed the Opioid Overdose Knowledge and Attitude Scales before and after training (intervention outcomes). Implementation outcomes were fidelity (competence and adherence of the trainer, N = 10; modified Fidelity Checklist) and acceptability of OEND (Acceptability of Intervention Measure), assessed from multiple perspectives (trainees, trainers, and an independent observer). Trainees' overdose knowledge, t(71) = - 8.12, p < 0.001, 95% CI [- 6.54, - 3.96], and attitudes, t(65) = - 6.85, p < 0.001, 95% CI [- 0.59, - 0.33], improved significantly from pre- to post-training. Stepwise multiple regression models indicated that adherence of the trainer rated from the observer perspective added significantly to the prediction of changes in overdose knowledge, F(1, 67) = 9.81, p = 0.003, and explained 13% of the variance in outcome. However, fidelity measures from the perspective of trainees or trainers and acceptability of OEND were not associated with changes in trainees' overdose knowledge or attitudes. OEND implementation outcomes and their relationship with intervention outcomes differed depending on the role of the fidelity rater in relation to the intervention. Specifically, our findings indicate that fidelity should be measured from an independent perspective (i.e., an individual who is experienced with fidelity rating but not directly involved in the intervention).Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43477-021-00021-4.

Project description:IntroductionEmergency departments (EDs) may be high-yield venues to address opioid deaths with education on both overdose prevention and appropriate actions in a witnessed overdose. In addition, the ED has the potential to equip patients with nasal naloxone kits as part of this effort. We evaluated the feasibility of an ED-based overdose prevention program and described the overdose risk knowledge, opioid use, overdoses, and overdose responses among participants who received overdose education and naloxone rescue kits (OEN) and participants who received overdose education only (OE).MethodsProgram participants were surveyed by telephone after their ED visit about their substance use, overdose risk knowledge, history of witnessed and personal overdoses, and actions in a witnessed overdose including use of naloxone.ResultsA total of 415 ED patients received OE or OEN between January 1, 2011 and February 28, 2012. Among those, 51 (12%) completed the survey; 37 (73%) of those received a naloxone kit, and 14 (27%) received OE only. Past 30-day opioid use was reported by 35% OEN and 36% OE, and an overdose was reported by 19% OEN and 29% OE. Among 53% (27/51) of participants who witnessed another individual experiencing an overdose, 95% OEN and 88% OE stayed with victim, 74% OEN and 38% OE called 911, 26% OEN and 25% OE performed rescue breathing, and 32% OEN (n=6) used a naloxone kit to reverse the overdose. We did not detect statistically significant differences between OEN and OE-only groups in opioid use, overdose or response to a witnessed overdose.ConclusionThis is the first study to demonstrate the feasibility of ED-based opioid overdose prevention education and naloxone distribution to trained laypersons, patients and their social network. The program reached a high-risk population that commonly witnessed overdoses and that called for help and used naloxone, when available, to rescue people. While the study was retrospective with a low response rate, it provides preliminary data for larger, prospective studies of ED-based overdose prevention programs.

Project description:Background and aimsTake-home naloxone can prevent death from heroin/opioid overdose, but pre-provision is difficult because naloxone is usually given by injection. Non-injectable alternatives, including naloxone nasal sprays, are currently being developed. To be effective, the intranasal (i.n.) spray dose must be adequate but not excessive, and early absorption must be comparable to intramuscular (i.m.) injection. We report on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of a specially produced concentrated novel nasal spray. The specific aims were to: (1) estimate PK profiles of i.n. naloxone, (2) compare early systemic exposure with i.n. versus i.m. naloxone and (3) estimate i.n. bioavailability.DesignOpen-label, randomized, five-way cross-over PK study.SettingClinical trials facility (Croydon, UK).ParticipantsThirty-eight healthy volunteers (age 20-54 years; 11 female).Intervention and comparatorThree doses of i.n. (1 mg/0.1 ml, 2 mg/0.1 ml, 4 mg/0.2 ml) versus 0.4 mg i.m. (reference) and 0.4 mg intravenous (i.v.) naloxone.MeasurementsRegular blood samples were taken, with high-frequency sampling during the first 15 minutes to capture early systemic exposure. PK parameters were determined from plasma naloxone concentrations. Exploratory analyses involved simulation of repeat administration.FindingsMean peak concentration (Cmax ) values for 1 mg (1.51 ng/ml), 2 mg (2.87 ng/ml) and 4 mg (6.02 ng/ml) i.n. exceeded 0.4 mg i.m. (1.27 ng/ml) naloxone. All three i.n. doses rapidly achieved plasma levels > 50% of peak concentrations (T50%) by 10 minutes, peaking at 15-30 minutes (Tmax ). For comparison, the i.m. reference reached Tmax at 10 minutes. Mean bioavailability was 47-51% for i.n. relative to i.m. naloxone. Simulation of repeat dosing (2 × 2 mg i.n. versus 5 × 0.4 mg i.m. doses) at 3-minute intervals showed that comparable plasma naloxone concentrations would be anticipated.ConclusionsConcentrated 2 mg intranasal naloxone is well-absorbed and provides early exposure comparable to 0.4 mg intramuscular naloxone, following the 0.4 mg intramuscular curve closely in the first 10 minutes post-dosing and maintaining blood levels above twice the intramuscular reference for the next 2 hours.

Project description:IntroductionCommunity programs to teach nonmedical laypeople how to recognize an opioid overdose and effectively resuscitate the victim using naloxone have proliferated recently as a significant component of harm-reduction efforts. Although many such programs target laypeople like first responders or friends and family members of people who use drugs, there are currently no programs that specifically target addiction counselors, despite their work with a client population at high risk of an opioid overdose.MethodsThe four-hour curriculum designed by the authors covered opioid agonist and antagonist pharmacology; opioid toxidrome signs; legal implications and indications for using the naloxone kits; and hands-on training. Participants were two cohorts of addiction counselors and addiction counseling trainees at our institution and an affiliated Opioid Treatment Program methadone clinic. Surveys testing participant knowledge and confidence were conducted at baseline, immediately post-training, six months post-training, and 12 months post-training.ResultsOverall, opioid and naloxone pharmacology knowledge, as well as the confidence to intervene in an overdose emergency, improved among participants in both cohorts. Knowledge scores at baseline (n = 36, median 5/10) improved significantly immediately post-training (n = 31, median 7/10, P < 0.0001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test) and were sustained six (n = 19) and 12 months (n = 11) later. Two participants reported using their naloxone kits to successfully reverse a client overdose in the 12 months after taking the course.DiscussionThese results from our knowledge translation pilot project suggest that our educational program to train addiction counselors in opioid pharmacology and toxicology, allowing them to recognize and respond to an opioid overdose, is feasible and could be effective. Specific barriers to implementing such educational programs include cost, stigma, and unclear best practice for designing and conducting these programs.ConclusionsFurther study of providing opioid pharmacology education and overdose and naloxone training to addiction counselors and counseling trainees appears to be warranted.

Project description:Background and aimsOpioid-related overdose death rates continue to rise in the United States, especially in racial/ethnic minority communities. Our objective was to determine if US municipalities with high percentages of non-white residents have equitable access to the overdose antidote naloxone distributed by community-based organizations.MethodsWe used community-based naloxone data from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health and the Rhode Island non-pharmacy naloxone distribution program for 2016-18. We obtained publicly available opioid-related overdose death data from Massachusetts and the Office of the State Medical Examiners in Rhode Island. We defined the naloxone coverage ratio as the number of community-based naloxone kits received by a resident in a municipality divided by the number of opioid-related overdose deaths among residents, updated annually. We used a Poisson regression with generalized estimating equations to analyze the relationship between the municipal racial/ethnic composition and naloxone coverage ratio. To account for the potential non-linear relationship between naloxone coverage ratio and race/ethnicity we created B-splines for the percentage of non-white residents; and for a secondary analysis examining the percentage of African American/black and Hispanic residents. The models were adjusted for the percentage of residents in poverty, urbanicity, state and population size.ResultsBetween 2016 and 2018, the annual naloxone coverage ratios range was 0-135. There was no difference in naloxone coverage ratios among municipalities with varying percentages of non-white residents in our multivariable analysis. In the secondary analysis, municipalities with higher percentages of African American/black residents had higher naloxone coverage ratios, independent of other factors. Naloxone coverage did not differ by percentage of Hispanic residents.ConclusionsThere appear to be no municipal-level racial/ethnic inequities in naloxone distribution in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, USA.

Project description:BackgroundPotentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) may contribute to opioid overdose.ObjectiveTo examine the association between PIP and adverse events.DesignCohort study.ParticipantsThree million seventy-eight thousand thirty-four individuals age ≥ 18, without disseminated cancer, who received prescription opioids between 2011 and 2015.Main measuresWe defined PIP as (a) morphine equivalent dose ≥ 100 mg/day in ≥ 3 months; (b) overlapping opioid and benzodiazepine prescriptions in ≥ 3 months; (c) ≥ 4 opioid prescribers in any quarter; (d) ≥ 4 opioid-dispensing pharmacies in any quarter; (e) cash purchase of prescription opioids on ≥ 3 occasions; and (f) receipt of opioids in 3 consecutive months without a documented pain diagnosis. We used Cox proportional hazards models to identify PIP practices associated with non-fatal opioid overdose, fatal opioid overdose, and all-cause mortality, controlling for covariates.Key resultsAll six types of PIP were associated with higher adjusted hazard for all-cause mortality, four of six with non-fatal overdose, and five of six with fatal overdose. Lacking a documented pain diagnosis was associated with non-fatal overdose (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.02-2.41), as was high-dose opioids (AHR 1.68, 95% CI 1.59-1.76). Co-prescription of benzodiazepines was associated with fatal overdose (AHR 4.23, 95% CI 3.85-4.65). High-dose opioids were associated with all-cause mortality (AHR 2.18, 95% CI 2.14-2.23), as was lacking a documented pain diagnosis (AHR 2.05, 95% CI 2.01-2.09). Compared to those who received opioids without PIP, the hazard for fatal opioid overdose with one, two, three, and ≥ four PIP subtypes were 4.24, 7.05, 10.28, and 12.99 (test of linear trend, p < 0.001).ConclusionsPIP was associated with higher hazard for all-cause mortality, fatal overdose, and non-fatal overdose. Our study implies the possibility of creating a risk score incorporating multiple PIP subtypes, which could be displayed to prescribers in real time.