Rapid opioid overdose response system technologies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Opioid overdose events are a time sensitive medical emergency, which is often reversible with naloxone administration if detected in time. Many countries are facing rising opioid overdose deaths and have been implementing rapid opioid overdose response Systems (ROORS). We describe how technology is increasingly being used in ROORS design, implementation and delivery. RECENT FINDINGS: Technology can contribute in significant ways to ROORS design, implementation, and delivery. Artificial intelligence-based modelling and simulations alongside wastewater-based epidemiology can be used to inform policy decisions around naloxone access laws and effective naloxone distribution strategies. Data linkage and machine learning projects can support service delivery organizations to mobilize and distribute community resources in support of ROORS. Digital phenotyping is an advancement in data linkage and machine learning projects, potentially leading to precision overdose responses. At the coalface, opioid overdose detection devices through fixed location or wearable sensors, improved connectivity, smartphone applications and drone-based emergency naloxone delivery all have a role in improving outcomes from opioid overdose. Data driven technologies also have an important role in empowering community responses to opioid overdose. SUMMARY: This review highlights the importance of technology applied to every aspect of ROORS. Key areas of development include the need to protect marginalized groups from algorithmic bias, a better understanding of individual overdose trajectories and new reversal agents and improved drug delivery methods.

The acceptability of overdose alert and response technologies: introducing the TPOM-ODART framework.

BACKGROUND: Opioids were implicated in approximately 88,000 fatal overdoses (OD) globally. However, in principle all opioid OD are reversible with the timely administration of naloxone hydrochloride. Despite the widespread availability of naloxone among people who use opioids (PWUO), many who suffer fatal OD use alone, without others present to administer the reversal agent. Recognising this key aspect of the challenge calls for innovations, a number of technological approaches have emerged which aim to connect OD victims with naloxone. However, the acceptability of OD response technologies to PWUO is of key concern. METHODS: Drawing on the Technology People Organisations Macroenvironment (TPOM) framework, this study sought to integrate acceptability-related findings in this space with primary research data from PWUO, affected family members and service providers to understand the factors involved in harm reduction technology acceptability. A qualitative study using a focus group methodology was conducted. The participant groups were people with lived experience of problem opioid use, affected family members and service providers. Data analysis followed a multi-stage approach to thematic analysis and utilised both inductive and deductive methods. RESULTS: Thirty individuals participated in one of six focus groups between November 2021 and September 2022. The analysis generated six major themes, three of which are reported in this article-selected for their close relevance to PWUO and their importance to developers of digital technologies for this group. 'Trust-in technologies, systems and people' was a major theme and was closely linked to data security, privacy and confidentiality. 'Balancing harm reduction, safety and ambivalence' reflects the delicate balance technological solutions must achieve to be acceptable to PWUO. Lastly, 'readiness-a double bind' encapsulates the perception shared across participant groups, that those at the highest risk, may be the least able to engage with interventions. CONCLUSION: Effective digital strategies to prevent fatal OD must be sensitive to the complex relationships between technological, social/human, organisational and wider macroenvironmental factors which can enable or impede intervention delivery. Trust, readiness and performance are central to technology acceptability for PWUO. An augmented TPOM was developed (the TPOM-ODART).

Overdose Alert and Response Technologies: State-of-the-art Review.

BACKGROUND: Drug overdose deaths, particularly from opioids, are a major global burden, with 128,000 deaths estimated in 2019. Opioid overdoses can be reversed through the timely administration of naloxone but only if responders are able to administer it. There is an emerging body of research and development in technologies that can detect the early signs of an overdose and facilitate timely responses. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to identify and classify overdose-specific digital technologies being developed, implemented, and evaluated. METHODS: We conducted a "state-of-the-art review." A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, ACM, IEEE Xplore, and SciELO. We also searched references from articles and scanned the gray literature. The search included terms related to telehealth and digital technologies, drugs, and overdose and papers published since 2010. We classified our findings by type of technology and its function, year of publication, country of study, study design, and theme. We performed a thematic analysis to classify the papers according to the main subject. RESULTS: Included in the selection were 17 original research papers, 2 proof-of-concept studies, 4 reviews, 3 US government grant registries, and 6 commercial devices that had not been named in peer-reviewed literature. All articles were published between 2017 and 2022, with a marked increase since 2019. All were based in or referred to the United States or Canada and concerned opioid overdose. In total, 39% (9/23) of the papers either evaluated or described devices designed to monitor vital signs and prompt an alert once a certain threshold indicating a potential overdose has been reached. A total of 43% (10/23) of the papers focused on technologies to alert potential responders to overdoses and facilitate response. In total, 48% (11/23) of the papers and 67% (4/6) of the commercial devices described combined alert and response devices. Sensors monitor a range of vital signs, such as oxygen saturation level, respiratory rate, or movement. Response devices are mostly smartphone apps enabling responders to arrive earlier to an overdose site. Closed-loop devices that can detect an overdose through a sensor and automatically administer naloxone without any external intervention are still in the experimental or proof-of-concept phase. The studies were grouped into 4 themes: acceptability (7/23, 30%), efficacy or effectiveness (5/23, 22%), device use and decision-making (3/23, 13%), and description of devices (6/23, 26%). CONCLUSIONS: There has been increasing interest in the research and application of these technologies in recent years. Literature suggests willingness to use these devices by people who use drugs and affected communities. More real-life studies are needed to test the effectiveness of these technologies to adapt them to the different settings and populations that might benefit from them.

Accuracy of substance exposure history in patients attending emergency departments after substance misuse; a comparison with biological sample analysis.

CONTEXT: Acute toxicity caused by illicit substance use is a common reason for emergency department (ED) presentation. Knowledge of the substances involved is helpful for predicting and managing potential toxicity, but limited information is available about the accuracy of patient-reported substance exposure. This study assessed the accuracy of the history of exposure in those reporting use of a single substance by comparison with those identified by detailed toxicological analysis, focusing on synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRA). METHODS: Adults (≥16 years) presenting between March 2015 and July 2021 to participating UK hospitals with toxicity after reporting use of a single illicit substance were included. Exposure details were documented from medical records and blood and/or urine samples analysed using high-resolution accurate mass liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HRAM LCMS). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the exposure history were calculated by comparison with biological sample analysis ("gold standard"). RESULTS: Single substance exposure was reported for 474 (median age 33 years, IQR: 18 range 16-75, 80% males) patients. Analysis commonly identified multiple substances (Median 3, IQR 2-5). A history of exposure was documented for 121 of 151 patients where a SCRA or metabolite was detected on analysis (sensitivity 80.1%, 95% CI 72.9, 86.2%). Corresponding proportions were lower for 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA, 44/70, 62.9%., 95% CI 50.5%, 74.1%), heroin 41/108 (38.0% 95% CI 28.8-47.8%) and cocaine (22/56, 31.3%, 95% CI 20.9, 43.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple undeclared substances were detected analytically in most patients reporting single substance use. Clinicians should be alert to the potential presence and toxicity of unreported substances when managing patients presenting after substance misuse.