PROVIDENT: Development and Validation of a Machine Learning Model to Predict Neighborhood-level Overdose Risk in Rhode Island.

BACKGROUND: Drug overdose persists as a leading cause of death in the United States, but resources to address it remain limited. As a result, health authorities must consider where to allocate scarce resources within their jurisdictions. Machine learning offers a strategy to identify areas with increased future overdose risk to proactively allocate overdose prevention resources. This modeling study is embedded in a randomized trial to measure the effect of proactive resource allocation on statewide overdose rates in Rhode Island (RI). METHODS: We used statewide data from RI from 2016 to 2020 to develop an ensemble machine learning model predicting neighborhood-level fatal overdose risk. Our ensemble model integrated gradient boosting machine and super learner base models in a moving window framework to make predictions in 6-month intervals. Our performance target, developed a priori with the RI Department of Health, was to identify the 20% of RI neighborhoods containing at least 40% of statewide overdose deaths, including at least one neighborhood per municipality. The model was validated after trial launch. RESULTS: Our model selected priority neighborhoods capturing 40.2% of statewide overdose deaths during the test periods and 44.1% of statewide overdose deaths during validation periods. Our ensemble outperformed the base models during the test periods and performed comparably to the best-performing base model during the validation periods. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the capacity for machine learning models to predict neighborhood-level fatal overdose risk to a degree of accuracy suitable for practitioners. Jurisdictions may consider predictive modeling as a tool to guide allocation of scarce resources.

Public Health Dashboards in Overdose Prevention: The Rhode Island Approach to Public Health Data Literacy, Partnerships, and Action.

As the field of public health rises to the demands of real-time surveillance and rapid data-sharing needs in a postpandemic world, it is time to examine our approaches to the dissemination and accessibility of such data. Distinct challenges exist when working to develop a shared public health language and narratives based on data. It requires that we assess our understanding of public health data literacy, revisit our approach to communication and engagement, and continuously evaluate our impact and relevance. Key stakeholders and cocreators are critical to this process and include people with lived experience, community organizations, governmental partners, and research institutions. In this viewpoint paper, we offer an instructive approach to the tools we used, assessed, and adapted across 3 unique overdose data dashboard projects in Rhode Island, United States. We are calling this model the "Rhode Island Approach to Public Health Data Literacy, Partnerships, and Action." This approach reflects the iterative lessons learned about the improvement of data dashboards through collaboration and strong partnerships across community members, state agencies, and an academic research team. We will highlight key tools and approaches that are accessible and engaging and allow developers and stakeholders to self-assess their goals for their data dashboards and evaluate engagement with these tools by their desired audiences and users.

"I Don't Go Overboard": Perceptions of Overdose Risk and Risk Reduction Strategies among People Who Use Drugs in Rhode Island.

Background: North America experiencing an unprecedented overdose epidemic, with data estimating almost 110,000 overdose deaths occurring in 2022 in the United States (US). To address fatal overdoses in the US, community organizations and local health departments in some jurisdictions have expanded community distribution of naloxone, and increased overdose prevention education, and other harm reduction supplies and services (e.g., fentanyl test strips, drug checking programs) to reduce harm for people who use drugs (PWUD). Objectives: Understanding how PWUD manage overdose risk within the context of these expanded services is important for ensuring public health services are meeting their needs. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 25 PWUD who were accessing harm reduction services in Rhode Island. Data were imported into NVivo where they were coded and analyzed thematically. Results: Our findings demonstrate the complexity of managing overdose risk in the context of a fentanyl drug supply. While most participants were concerned about overdosing, they sought to manage overdose risk through their own harm reduction practices (e.g., testing their drugs, going slow) and drug purchasing dynamics, even when using alone. Conclusions: Study findings point to the need to implement and scale-up community-level interventions to better support PWUD within the context of the current US overdose crisis.

Differences in Substance Use and Harm Reduction Practices by Race and Ethnicity: Rhode Island Harm Reduction Surveillance System, 2021-2022.

CONTEXT: In the United States, minority populations are disproportionately affected by the overdose epidemic, have higher mortality rates, and unequal access to harm reduction and treatment services. OBJECTIVE: This analysis aims to better understand harm reduction utilization and substance use patterns among minority populations to improve overdose outreach and prevention initiatives in Rhode Island. DESIGN: The present analysis used data from the Harm Reduction Surveillance System from January 2021 to December 2022 (N = 393). Chi-square tests and multivariable regression models were used to investigate differences in substance use behaviors by race and ethnicity. SETTING: Rhode Island. PARTICIPANTS: Participants include individuals who self-reported the use of illicit drugs, currently reside in Rhode Island, and were older than 18 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Methods of drug use and uptake of harm reduction practices. RESULTS: Among survey participants, 41% were non-Hispanic White, 57% were aged 25 to 44 years, 62% identified as male, and 95% had health insurance coverage. Most participants reported smoking as their method of drug use (90%) and harm reduction practices were underutilized by all race and ethnicity groups. Fewer non-Hispanic Black participants reported carrying naloxone compared to the other race and ethnicity groups. Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic participants were significantly less likely to inject drugs compared with non-Hispanic White participants (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04-0.45) (AOR = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.18-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Smoking was the most common self-reported method of substance administration for all participants, whereas injection was more prevalent among non-Hispanic White participants. There is a continued need for minority-led and culturally informed harm reduction and treatment services for minority populations.

Bystander Presence and Response During Accidental and Undetermined Drug Overdose Deaths: Rhode Island, January 1, 2016-December 31, 2021.

With timely intervention from a bystander, drug overdose victims are more likely to survive. To characterize the frequency of bystander presence and identify overdose response barriers, we analyzed data from overdose fatalities occurring in Rhode Island from 2016 to 2021. Overall, about half (n=1,039; 48.7%) of all overdose deaths in Rhode Island had at least one bystander present. Among decedents who had at least one bystander who was unable to respond (n=338), top reasons of non-response were because they were spatially separated (64.8%), failed to recognize the signs of overdose (54.1%), or were unaware the victim was using drugs (40.2%). To promote by- stander presence and address barriers to bystander response during an overdose, intervention strategies should include efforts that reduce solitary drug use and maximize bystander efficacy, including increasing awareness on the dangers of using drugs alone, increasing the availability of naloxone, and education on recognizing signs of overdose.

Buprenorphine prescribing and treatment accessibility in response to regulation changes due to the COVID-19 public health emergency.

BACKGROUND: In 2021, over 80,000 fatal overdoses occurred in the United States. Since 2020, the federal government has enacted multiple regulatory changes around buprenorphine prescribing for opioid use disorder (OUD) to increase access to buprenorphine. This study aims to explore trends in buprenorphine treatment initiation pre- and post-public health emergency to evaluate changes in the context of X-waiver relaxations and telehealth allowances. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, all RI residents who filled a buprenorphine prescription at a pharmacy in Rhode Island (RI), Massachusetts, and Connecticut between January 2017 and December 2023 were obtained from the RI Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP). The study excluded buprenorphine products not approved for OUD treatment from the analysis. Identified individuals had initiated buprenorphine for OUD during the study period if they did not have a prior prescription or if they had >30 days without buprenorphine exposure between their prescriptions. Spearman's rank correlation tests were used to identify significant associations between outcomes and regulation changes. RESULTS: The average number of patients dispensed buprenorphine did not significantly change over the study period, however the average number of initiates significantly decreased (ρ = -0.38255, p = .0003). The average number of providers prescribing CII-CV substances in RI has increased 3.4 % over the study period. The average percentage of prescribers in the PDMP prescribing buprenorphine for OUD doubled (ρ = 0.96075, p < .0001). CONCLUSION: Though efforts have been made to increase buprenorphine initiation, buprenorphine initiates remain well below pre-PHE levels. Efforts must continue to eliminate existing barriers to treatment and improve access to individuals seeking treatment.

Association between comorbid chronic pain or prior hospitalization for mental illness and substance use treatment among a cohort at high risk of opioid overdose.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pain and serious mental illness increase risk of opioid use, and opioid use can exacerbate both conditions. Substance use disorder (SUD) treatment can be lifesaving, but chronic pain and serious mental illness may make recovery challenging. We evaluated the association between current chronic pain and prior hospitalization for mental illness and 90-day SUD treatment engagement, among emergency department (ED) patients at high risk of opioid overdose. METHODS: We conducted a cohort analysis of 648 ED patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial in Rhode Island. We linked baseline study data on chronic pain and prior hospitalization for mental illness to statewide administrative data on state-licensed treatment programs (including methadone) and buprenorphine treatment via prescription. We defined treatment engagement as initiation of a state-licensed treatment program, transfer between state-licensed programs/providers, or a buprenorphine prescription (re-)fill. We used modified Poisson models to estimate the association between each baseline comorbidity and treatment engagement within 90 days following the ED visit, adjusted for a priori potential confounders. In an exploratory analysis, models were stratified by baseline treatment status. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 37 years; 439 (68 %) were male, and 446 (69 %) had been recently unhoused. Overall, 278 participants (43 %) engaged in treatment within 90 days of the ED visit. Participants with prior hospitalization for mental illness were more likely to engage in treatment than those without (adjusted risk ratio [ARR] = 1.24, 95 % confidence interval [CI] = 1.01-1.53), although this association was only among those already accessing treatment at baseline (ARR = 1.58, 95 % CI = 1.10-2.27). Chronic pain was not associated with 90-day treatment engagement overall (ARR = 1.12, 95 % CI = 0.91-1.38) or within baseline treatment subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Among ED patients at high risk of opioid overdose and accessing treatment at baseline, those with prior hospitalization for mental illness (but not chronic pain) were more likely to engage in treatment following the ED visit, which may reflect disproportionate initiation of additional treatment programs, transfer between programs/providers, or ongoing buprenorphine treatment. Touchpoints within the medical system should be leveraged to ensure that everyone, including those with serious mental illness, can access high-quality SUD treatment at the desired intensity level.

Association Between Emergency Department Operational Metrics and Substance Use Disorder Treatment Interest in Two Rhode Island Hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined if emergency department (ED) operational metrics, such as wait time or length of stay, are associated with interest in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment referral among patients at high risk of opioid overdose. METHODS: In this observational study, 648 ED patients at high risk of opioid overdose completed a baseline questionnaire. Operational metrics were summarized using electronic health record data. The association between operational metrics and treatment interest was estimated with multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Longer time to room (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.01-1.25) and length of stay (AOR=1.02, 95% CI=1.00-1.05) were associated with treatment referral interest. Time to provider and number of treating providers showed no significant association. CONCLUSION: Longer rooming wait times and longer ED visits were associated with increased SUD treatment referral interest. This suggests patients who wait for longer periods may be motivated for treatment and warrant further resource investment.

Effect of a peer-led emergency department behavioral intervention on non-fatal opioid overdose: 18-month outcome in the Navigator randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Emergency departments (EDs) provide an opportunity to identify people at risk of overdose and reduce the risk. We evaluated the effect of an ED behavioral intervention delivered by peer recovery support specialists (PRSSs) on non-fatal opioid overdose. DESIGN: Two-arm, randomized trial. SETTING: Two EDs in Rhode Island, USA. PARTICIPANTS: ED patients presenting with an opioid overdose, complications of opioid use disorder or a recent history of opioid overdose (November 2018-May 2021). Among 648 participants, the mean age was 36.9 years, 68.2% were male and 68.5% were White. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Participants were randomized to receive a behavioral intervention from a PRSS (n = 323) or a licensed clinical social worker (LICSW) (n = 325). PRSS and LICSW used evidence-based interviewing and intervention techniques, informed by their lived experience (PRSS) or clinical theory and practice (LICSW). MEASUREMENTS: We identified non-fatal opioid overdoses in the 18 months following the ED visit through linkage to statewide emergency medical services data using a validated case definition. The primary outcome was any non-fatal opioid overdose during the 18-month follow-up period. FINDINGS: Among 323 participants randomized to the PRSS arm, 81 (25.1%) had a non-fatal opioid overdose during follow-up, compared with 95 (29.2%) of 325 participants randomized to the LICSW arm (P = 0.24). There was no statistically significant difference in the effectiveness of randomization to the PRSS arm versus the LICSW arm on the risk of non-fatal opioid overdose, adjusting for the history of previous overdose (relative risk = 0.86, 95% confidence interval = 0.67-1.11). CONCLUSIONS: In Rhode Island, USA, over one-in-four emergency department patients at high risk of overdose experience a non-fatal opioid overdose in the 18 months post-discharge. We found no evidence that the risk of non-fatal opioid overdose differs for emergency department patients receiving a behavioral intervention from a peer recovery support specialist versus a licensed clinical social worker.

Trends in recurrent overdose and treatment initiation following emergency department visits for opioid overdose between 2016 and 2021.

BACKGROUND: Overdose remains a pressing public health concern in the United States, particularly with the emergence of fentanyl and other potent synthetic opioids in the drug supply. We evaluated trends in recurrent overdose and opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment initiation following emergency department (ED) visits for opioid overdose to inform response efforts. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used electronic health record and statewide administrative data from Rhode Island residents who visited EDs for opioid overdose between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2021, a period with fentanyl predominance in the local drug supply. The primary outcome was recurrent overdose in the 365 days following the initial ED visit. OUD treatment initiation within 180 days following the initial ED visit was considered as a secondary outcome. Trends in study outcomes were summarized by year of the initial ED visit. RESULTS: Among 1745 patients attending EDs for opioid overdose, 20 % (n=352) experienced a recurrent overdose within 365 days, and this percentage was similar by year (p=0.12). Among patients who experienced any recurrent overdose, the median time to first recurrent overdose was 88 days (interquartile range=23-208), with 85 % (n=299/352) being non-fatal. Among patients not engaged in OUD treatment at their initial ED visit, 33 % (n=448/1370) initiated treatment within 180 days; this was similar by year (p=0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Following ED visits for opioid overdose in Rhode Island from 2016-2021, the one-year risk of recurrent overdose and six-month treatment initiation rate remained stable over time. Innovative prevention strategies and improved treatment access are needed.

Characterizing opioid overdose hotspots for place-based overdose prevention and treatment interventions: A geo-spatial analysis of Rhode Island, USA.

OBJECTIVE: Examine differences in neighborhood characteristics and services between overdose hotspot and non-hotspot neighborhoods and identify neighborhood-level population factors associated with increased overdose incidence. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective analysis of Rhode Island, USA residents who had a fatal or non-fatal overdose from 2016 to 2020 using an environmental scan and data from Rhode Island emergency medical services, State Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System, and the American Community Survey. We conducted a spatial scan via SaTScan to identify non-fatal and fatal overdose hotspots and compared the characteristics of hotspot and non-hotspot neighborhoods. We identified associations between census block group-level characteristics using a Besag-York-Mollié model specification with a conditional autoregressive spatial random effect. RESULTS: We identified 7 non-fatal and 3 fatal overdose hotspots in Rhode Island during the study period. Hotspot neighborhoods had higher proportions of Black and Latino/a residents, renter-occupied housing, vacant housing, unemployment, and cost-burdened households. A higher proportion of hotspot neighborhoods had a religious organization, a health center, or a police station. Non-fatal overdose risk increased in a dose responsive manner with increasing proportions of residents living in poverty. There was increased relative risk of non-fatal and fatal overdoses in neighborhoods with crowded housing above the mean (RR 1.19 [95 % CI 1.05, 1.34]; RR 1.21 [95 % CI 1.18, 1.38], respectively). CONCLUSION: Neighborhoods with increased prevalence of housing instability and poverty are at highest risk of overdose. The high availability of social services in overdose hotspots presents an opportunity to work with established organizations to prevent overdose deaths.