Critical incidents in Colorado's opioid treatment programs: A comparison of the COVID-19 pandemic to previous years.

INTRODUCTION: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) guidance allowed opioid treatment programs (OTPs) greater flexibility to provide take-home medication doses to patients. This study aims to characterize trends in the rates of critical incidents-safety events occurring in OTPs that are reportable to regulatory entities-across all Colorado OTPs during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of critical incidents (CIs) for patients enrolled in Colorado OTPs between the years 2017 to 2022, as recorded in Colorado Behavioral Health Administration's (BHA) Opioid Treatment Program Critical Incident Repository Dataset. March 15, 2020 was considered the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in Colorado, so only incidents which occurred from March 15-December 31 of each year were included. CI rate per 100 patients was calculated by dividing CI annual count between March 15-December 31 by the census of enrolled patients at the calendar midpoint of this period, which is August 7. Means comparison tests assessed differences in CI rates. RESULTS: OTP patient enrollment in Colorado increased from 4377 in 2017 to 7327 in 2022. Overall, Medication Diversion accounted for 70 % of CIs, followed by Death (14 %), and Other (5 %). There was a significant increase in the overall rate of CIs from 2017 to 2022 (1.1 % to 3.4 %). The average post-COVID CI rate was higher than pre-COVID (4.0 % vs. 2.4 %). There was no difference, however, in the post-COVID rate of CIs when exclusively compared to 2019 (4.0 % vs. 4.1 %). Post-pandemic years had significantly more CIs per month than pre-pandemic years (27.6 ± 5.6 vs 15.8 ± 3.5). There was no difference in mean monthly CIs between 2019 and post-pandemic (28.5 ± 5.3 vs 27.6 ± 5.6). CONCLUSIONS: There was no increase in the rate of reportable CIs in Colorado OTPs following the SAMHSA COVID-19 guidance increasing take-home doses when comparing 2019 to post-pandemic years. The notable increase in CI incidence occurred from 2018 to 2019, predating the pandemic. These data offer a measure of reassurance for the safety of increased take-home methadone doses. There should be further consideration of how a greater number of take-home doses might benefit both patients and OTPs.

How Do Colorado Public Libraries Respond to Patron Queries about Opioid Use Disorder? A Secret Shopper Study.

Background: Colorado's age-adjusted fatal opioid overdose rate increased over 400% from 2000 to 2020. Public libraries are increasingly valuable community resources for accessing health-related information. We sought to evaluate the availability and types of opioid use disorder (OUD)-related resources offered through Colorado Public Library branches using secret shoppers to collect data. Methods: This was a cross sectional study of 197 Colorado Public Libraries in 2021. Anonymous auditors posed as library patrons asking a brief standardized script about availability of OUD-related resources over the phone. We conducted descriptive analyses of the libraries contacted, the response types of OUD resources provided, and information about naloxone availability. Outcomes were compared between urban/rural and libraries within/outside the Denver Public Library (DPL) system via means comparison tests. Results: Approximately 50% of libraries were classified as urban. Most (81%) of the libraries offered a valid OUD-resource, and over half (51%) provided a referral to a treatment center offering at least one medication for OUD. Over a third (36%) of librarians referenced the statewide naloxone standing order allowing patients to obtain naloxone from a pharmacy without prescription. One in ten libraries provided at least one invalid referral resource. Libraries within the DPL system referenced Colorado's naloxone standing order at higher rates than non-DPL libraries. Conclusions: Public libraries may benefit from the development of a standard for OUD-related resource training/education that can be distributed across the state to create a space for community members to obtain resources related to substance use.

Concomitant Filled Prescriptions of Oxymorphone or Oxycodone with CYP3A Inhibitors and Inducers.

BACKGROUND: Oxymorphone's metabolism does not involve the hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) system. The effect of this pharmacokinetic feature of oxymorphone on opioid prescribing is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the relative frequency with which oxymorphone and oxycodone (a CYP3A-metabolized opioid analgesic) were each prescribed to patients concomitantly receiving CYP3A-modifying drugs (i.e., inducers and inhibitors) to characterize opioid-prescribing patterns in patients at risk for CYP3A-related drug interactions. METHODS: We analyzed the Sentinel Distributed Database from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2016, to identify the proportion of patients with concomitant dispensing of selected CYP3A modifiers among initiators of oxymorphone. We then repeated the analysis using oxycodone instead of oxymorphone. We conducted sensitivity analyses that varied the washout periods for each opioid to account for potential opioid switching. RESULTS: In the primary analysis, the proportion of patients with concomitant incident dispensings of oxymorphone and selected CYP3A modifiers was 3.26% (95% CI = 3.09%-3.43%), and the proportion of patients with incident dispensings of oxycodone and selected CYP3A modifiers was 2.82% (95% CI = 2.79%-2.85%). The difference between proportions was 0.43% (95% CI = 0.26%-0.60%). Sensitivity analyses that varied the washout periods for each opioid with respect to the other opioid to account for switching yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: We observed similar proportions of patients using selected CYP3A modifiers concomitantly with both oxymorphone and oxycodone. While the CIs of the point estimates did not overlap, the absolute differences between the proportions were small. DISCLOSURES: This project was supported by Task Order HHSF22301001T under Master Agreement HHSF223201400030I from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA approved the study protocol, including the statistical analysis plan, and reviewed and approved the manuscript. Coauthors from the FDA participated in the results interpretation and in the preparation and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Coyle, Money, Staffa, Meyer, and Woods are employed by the FDA. The other authors have no financial conflicts of interest to report. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Concomitant use of buprenorphine for medication-assisted treatment of opioid use disorder and benzodiazepines: Using the prescription behavior surveillance system.

BACKGROUND: Despite clinical guidelines discouraging the practice, it is well-documented that the concomitant use of benzodiazepines and opioid analgesics occurs regularly. Information on concomitant use of buprenorphine for medication-assisted treatment (MAT) of opioid use disorder (OUD) and benzodiazepines, however, is limited. Thus, we aimed to describe real-world drug dispensing patterns for the concomitant use of buprenorphine products approved for MAT and benzodiazepines. METHODS: We examined concomitant use of buprenorphine for MAT and benzodiazepines using the 2013 Prescription Behavior Surveillance System data from eight states. For prescription-level analysis, we estimated the proportion of concomitant buprenorphine and benzodiazepine prescriptions and the proportions of concomitant prescriptions prescribed by the same provider (co-prescribing) and dispensed by the same pharmacy (co-dispensing) for each state. For patient-level analysis, we calculated the proportion of patients with ≥1 buprenorphine therapy episode overlapping with a benzodiazepine episode, i.e., concomitant users, and the proportion of concomitant users who experienced co-prescribing or co-dispensing. RESULTS: In 2013, 1,925,072 prescriptions of buprenorphine products for MAT were dispensed to 190,907 patients in eight states. Approximately 1 in 8 buprenorphine prescriptions was used concomitantly with ≥1 benzodiazepine prescription(s). Co-prescribing proportions ranged from 22.2 to 64.6% across states, while co-dispensing proportions ranged from 54.7 to 91.0%. Approximately 17.7% of patients had >1 buprenorphine episode overlapping a benzodiazepine episode for ≥7 cumulative days' supply. Among these patients, 33.1-65.2% experienced co-prescribing, and 65.1-93.3% experienced co-dispensing. CONCLUSIONS: The concomitant use of buprenorphine for MAT and benzodiazepines occurs frequently, with variations by state in co-prescribing and co-dispensing.

Unintentional dural puncture with a Tuohy needle increases risk of chronic headache.

BACKGROUND: Neuraxial analgesia is chosen by almost half of women who give birth in the United States. Unintentional dural puncture is the most common complication of this pain management technique, occurring in 0.4% to 6% of parturients. Severe positional headaches develop acutely in 70% to 80% of these parturients. Acute postdural puncture headaches are well known, but few studies have investigated long-term sequelae. We investigated the incidence of and risk factors for chronic headache and chronic back pain in parturients who experienced unintentional dural puncture with a 17-gauge Tuohy needle compared with matched controls. METHODS: In a case control design, 40 parturients who sustained unintentional dural puncture with a 17-gauge Tuohy needle over an 18-month period and 40 controls matched for age, weight, and time of delivery were recruited by telephone and 2 validated questionnaires were administered assessing headache and back pain symptoms 12 to 24 months after delivery. RESULTS: The incidence of chronic headaches in the study group (28%) was significantly higher than in the matched controls (5%) (OR = 7, P = 0.0129). Subjects who experienced dural punctures were more likely than controls to report chronic back pain (OR = 4, P = 0.0250), but treatment with an epidural blood patch was not a risk factor for chronic back pain. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who incur unintentional dural punctures with large-gauge needles are surprisingly likely to continue to suffer chronic headaches. Treatment with an epidural blood patch does not enhance the risk of chronic back pain. The pathophysiology underlying these symptoms and the best treatment for this syndrome are not known.