Take-Home Naloxone Program Implementation: Lessons Learned From Seven Chicago-Area Hospitals.

Despite consensus recommendations from the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the surgeon general to dispense naloxone to discharged ED patients at risk for opioid overdose, there remain numerous logistic, financial, and administrative barriers to implementing "take-home naloxone" programs at individual hospitals. This article describes the recent collective experience of 7 Chicago-area hospitals in implementing take-home naloxone programs. We highlight key barriers, such as hesitancy from hospital administrators, lack of familiarity with relevant rules and regulations in regard to medication dispensing, and inability to secure a supply of naloxone for dispensing. We also highlight common facilitators of success, such as early identification of a "C-suite" champion and the formation of a multidisciplinary team of program leaders. Finally, we provide recommendations that will assist emergency departments planning to implement their own take-home naloxone programs and will inform policymakers of specific needs that may facilitate dissemination of naloxone to the public.

Syndrome surveillance of fentanyl-laced heroin outbreaks: Utilization of EMS, Medical Examiner and Poison Center databases.

OBJECTIVE: Describe surveillance data from three existing surveillance systems during an unexpected fentanyl outbreak in a large metropolitan area. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of three data sets: Chicago Fire Department EMS, Cook County Medical Examiner, and Illinois Poison Center. Each included data from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015. EMS data included all EMS responses in Chicago, Illinois, for suspected opioid overdose in which naloxone was administered and EMS personnel documented other criteria indicative of opioid overdose. Medical Examiner data included all deaths in Cook County, Illinois, related to heroin, fentanyl or both. Illinois Poison Center data included all calls in Chicago, Illinois, related to fentanyl, heroin, and other prescription opioids. Descriptive statistics using Microsoft Excel® were used to analyze the data and create figures. RESULTS: We identified a spike in opioid-related EMS responses during an 11-day period from September 30-October 10, 2015. Medical Examiner data showed an increase in both fentanyl and mixed fentanyl/heroin related deaths during the months of September and October, 2015 (375% and 550% above the median, respectively.) Illinois Poison Center data showed no significant increase in heroin, fentanyl, or other opioid-related calls during September and October 2015. CONCLUSION: Our data suggests that EMS data is an effective real-time surveillance mechanism for changes in the rate of opioid overdoses. Medical Examiner's data was found to be valuable for confirmation of EMS surveillance data and identification of specific intoxicants. Poison Center data did not correlate with EMS or Medical Examiner data.

Understanding Clinician Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Relating to Nonpharmaceutical Fentanyl and Harm Reduction.

BACKGROUND: Nonpharmaceutical fentanyl (NPF) is driving the national epidemic of opioid overdose deaths. Clinicians can play a role in fostering awareness of this growing risk and delivering interventions to reduce mortality. However, there is limited research assessing clinician knowledge, attitudes, and practices relating to NPF and harm reduction strategies. METHODS: A 34-question survey was designed to assess knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to NPF and harm reduction strategies of adult and pediatric hospital-based and emergency clinicians at a single academic medical center. Results were summarized using descriptive statistics. Chi square and Fishers exact tests were used to compare groups. RESULTS: There were 136 survey responses. The majority (88%) of respondents correctly answered a question on NPF potency. Most respondents were aware that NPF exposure was very (84%) or somewhat likely (10%) for someone using illicit opioids and very (44%) or somewhat likely (46%) for nonopioid drugs. Respondents viewed overdose prevention as highly important for patients using illicit opioids (93%) and nonopioid drugs (86%) but few (21%) were very/extremely familiar with overdose prevention strategies and just over half (57%) were comfortable/very comfortable counseling about overdose prevention. There was wide variability in utilization of harm reduction/treatment strategies (7.3% frequently providing fentanyl test kits to 70% frequently prescribing naloxone). Higher levels of comfort and familiarity with overdose prevention were associated with more frequent counseling on harm reduction strategies. Pediatric-only clinicians had less familiarity (5% very/extremely familiar) and comfort (35% comfortable/very comfortable) with overdose prevention, and limited use of harm reduction strategies (0%-31% using each strategy frequently). CONCLUSIONS: While clinicians had knowledge and awareness of NPF and rated overdose prevention as highly important, utilization of harm reduction and treatment strategies was variable. This study highlights opportunities for education and system-based support to improve clinician-driven harm reduction practices for patients at risk of overdose.

Applying Project ECHO (Extension for Community Health Care Outcomes) to improve addiction care in rural emergency departments.

Background: Advancements in research and legislation have improved emergency provider ability to treat opioid use disorder (OUD), but dissemination into rural emergency departments (EDs) is limited. Project Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) allows community generalists to learn from specialists through telementoring. We aimed to use ECHO to facilitate knowledge translation, increase confidence, and change behavior of rural ED providers treating patients with OUD. Methods: Stakeholder interviews were conducted with rural ED providers. A group of ED addiction experts created an ECHO curriculum with eight OUD topics. ED health professionals were recruited and completed pre/post surveys centered around knowledge and comfort with treating OUD in the ED, with focus on clinical practice and stigma. Following the ECHO model, sessions included a 20-min didactic followed by two cases presented by participants, with discussion facilitated by faculty. Results: Twenty-seven participants registered; seven attended ≥75% of sessions and completed both surveys. Of the seven, three were physicians, two advanced practice providers, one nurse, and one clinical pharmacist. Eight 1-hour sessions were conducted in two cohorts between January and December 2021. On a 5-point Likert scale, respondents on average agreed with questions evaluating acceptability (mean ± SD 3.96 ± 0.64), appropriateness (mean ± SD 4.18 ± 1.18), and feasibility (mean ± SD 4.00 ± 1.17). Participants had a 1.09-point increase (paired t-test = 2.43, p = 0.05) on 7-point Likert-scale questions measuring self-efficacy and a 0.13-point change (paired t-test = 2.64, p = 0.04) on 4-point Likert scale questions measuring stigmatizing attitudes (reduction of attitudes). A total of 71% (5/7) reported changes in clinical practice and 57% (4/7) in departmental protocols after participation. Conclusions: Our ED OUD ECHO course successfully created a model for rural ED providers to learn from ED addiction experts. It was well received and impacted self-reported provider stigmatizing attitudes, patient-facing behavior, and departmental initiatives. Recruitment was challenging and participation was limited. Future efforts will target maximizing recruitment.

Medical Student Screening for Naloxone Eligibility in the Emergency Department: A Value-Added Role to Fight the Opioid Epidemic.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) for use by laypersons are safe and effective at preventing deaths from opioid overdose, but emergency department (ED) implementation is challenging. Curricula addressing OEND could enable students to serve in value-added roles on the clinical team, overcome challenges of naloxone distribution, and improve patient care. METHODS: We created a 1-hour didactic session on opioid use disorder and OEND for first-year medical students in the emergency medicine elective. During two clinical shifts, students used this knowledge to perform screenings to identify patients at high risk of overdose. If a patient screened positive, students performed patient education and then notified the physician, who ordered a naloxone kit. RESULTS: Thirty students received the didactic and conducted screening shifts. Of 147 patients screened, 40% (n = 59) were positive for naloxone eligibility, 21% (n = 31) reported that someone close to them used opioids, 18% (n = 26) had witnessed an opioid overdose, 12% (n = 17) had previously overdosed themselves, and 12% (n = 18) previously knew what naloxone was. Fifty-nine naloxone kits were distributed over the 3-month pilot versus 13 naloxone prescriptions for patients discharged from the ED the prior year. DISCUSSION: Through didactic training and structured patient engagement, medical students gained knowledge of and hands-on experience with addiction medicine, discussed sensitive topics with patients, and identified a high volume of patients eligible to receive naloxone. Medical student screening for OEND in ED patients is feasible and adds significant value to the clinical team.

Point-of-care naloxone distribution in the emergency department: A pilot study.

PURPOSE: Opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) for use by laypersons has been shown to be safe and effective, but implementation in the emergency department (ED) setting is challenging. Recent literature has shown a discouragingly low rate of obtainment of naloxone that is prescribed in the ED setting. We conducted a study to evaluate the feasibility of point-of-care (POC) distribution of naloxone in an ED, hypothesizing a rate of obtainment higher than prescription fill rates reported in previous studies. SUMMARY: A multidisciplinary team of experts, including pharmacists, physicians, nurses, and case management professionals used an iterative process to develop a protocol for POC OEND in the ED. The protocol includes 5 steps: (1) patient screening, (2) order placement in the electronic health record (EHR), (3) a patient training video, (4) dispensing of naloxone kit, and (5) written discharge instructions. The naloxone kits were assembled, labeled to meet requirements for a prescription, and stored in an automated dispensing cabinet. Two pharmacists, 30 attending physicians, 65 resident physicians, and 108 nurses were trained. In 8 months, 134 orders for take-home naloxone were entered and 117 naloxone kits were dispensed, resulting in an obtainment rate of 87.3%. The indication for take-home naloxone kit was heroin use for 61 patients (92.4%). CONCLUSION: POC naloxone distribution is feasible and yielded a rate of obtainment significantly higher than previous studies in which naloxone was prescribed. POC distribution can be replicated at other hospitals with low rates of obtainment.

A Case for Risk Stratification in Survivors of Firearm and Interpersonal Violence in the Urban Environment.

The emergency department (ED) serves as the main source of care for patients who are victims of interpersonal violence. As a result, emergency physicians across the nation are at the forefront of delivering care and determining dispositions for many at-risk patients in a dynamic healthcare environment. In the majority of cases, survivors of interpersonal violence are treated and discharged based on the physical implications of the injury without consideration for risk of reinjury and the structural drivers that may be at play. Some exceptions may exist at institutions with hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs). At these institutions, disposition decisions often include consideration of a patient's risk for repeat exposure to violence. Ideally, HVIP services would be available to all survivors of interpersonal violence, but a variety of current constraints limit availability. Here we offer a scoping review of HVIPs and our perspective on how risk-stratification could help emergency physicians determine which patients will benefit most from HVIP services and potentially reduce re-injury secondary to interpersonal violence.

Naloxone Prescriptions Among Commercially Insured Individuals at High Risk of Opioid Overdose.

Importance: As opioid-related mortality continues to increase, naloxone remains a critical intervention in preventing overdose death. Opportunities to expand access through the health care setting should be optimized. Objective: To determine the characteristics of naloxone prescribing for US patients at high risk of opioid overdose. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used Truven Health MarketScan data from October 1, 2015, through December 31, 2016, of individuals with International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision codes related to opioid use, misuse, dependence, and overdose. The cohort included 138 108 commercially insured individuals aged 15 years or older in the United States with claims related to opioid misuse or dependence, opioid-related overdose, or both. Exposures: Outpatient naloxone pharmacy claims. Main Outcomes and Measures: Demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, health care service use, and proportion prescribed naloxone were included in multivariable logistic regression analyses to test the association of opioid risk group with naloxone claim. Results: Of 138 108 high-risk individuals (mean [SD] age, 43.4 [0.4] years; 72 435 [52.4%] men), 2135 (1.5%) were prescribed naloxone. Having prior diagnoses of both opioid misuse or dependence and overdose was associated with a greater likelihood of receiving naloxone (odds ratio [OR], 2.32; 95% CI, 1.98-2.72; P < .001) compared with having a prior diagnosis of opioid misuse or dependence without overdose. Having a prior diagnosis of opioid overdose alone was associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving naloxone (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57-0.94; P = .01) compared with having a prior diagnosis of opioid misuse or dependence without overdose. Factors associated with lower naloxone prescription included being aged 30 to 44 years (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.62-0.84; P < .001) and being from the Midwest (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.54-0.71; P < .001) or West (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74-0.98; P = .03). Opioid use disorder treatment, such as use of medication-assisted therapy (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.53-1.86; P < .001), visiting a detoxification facility (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.31-1.76; P < .001), or receiving other substance use disorder treatment (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.04-1.30; P = .01), were associated with increased likelihood of receiving naloxone, as were receiving outpatient care from a pain specialist (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.40-1.76; P < .001), psychologist (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.29-1.70; P < .001), or surgeon (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.32; P < .001). Overall, 98.5% (n = 135 973) of high-risk patients did not received naloxone, despite many interactions with the health care system, including 88 618 hospitalizations, 229 680 emergency department visits, 298 058 internal medicine visits, and 568 448 family practice visits. Conclusions and Relevance: Patients at high risk of opioid overdose rarely received prescriptions for naloxone despite numerous interactions with the health care system. Prescribing in emergency, inpatient, and outpatient settings represents an opportunity to improve access.