Association between trajectories of prescription opioid use and risk of opioid use disorder and overdose among US nonmetastatic breast cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: To examine the association between prescription opioid use trajectories and risk of opioid use disorder (OUD) or overdose among nonmetastatic breast cancer survivors by treatment type. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included female nonmetastatic breast cancer survivors with at least 1 opioid prescription fill in 2010-2019 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results linked Medicare data. Opioid mean daily morphine milligram equivalents (MME) calculated within 1.5 years after initiating active breast cancer therapy. Group-based trajectory models identified distinct opioid use trajectory patterns. Risk of time to first OUD/overdose event within 1 year after the trajectory period was calculated for distinct trajectory groups using Cox proportional hazards models. Analyses were stratified by treatment type. RESULTS: Four opioid use trajectories were identified for each treatment group. For 38,030 survivors with systemic endocrine therapy, 3 trajectories were associated with increased OUD/overdose risk compared with early discontinuation: minimal dose (< 5 MME; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.73 [95% CI 1.43-2.09]), very low dose (5-25 MME; 2.67 [2.05-3.48]), and moderate dose (51-90 MME; 6.20 [4.69-8.19]). For 9477 survivors with adjuvant chemotherapy, low-dose opioid use was associated with higher OUD/overdose risk (aHR = 7.33 [95% CI 2.52-21.31]) compared with early discontinuation. For 3513 survivors with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the differences in OUD/OD risks across the 4 trajectories were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare nonmetastatic breast cancer survivors receiving systemic endocrine therapy or adjuvant chemotherapy, compared with early discontinuation, low-dose or moderate-dose opioid use were associated with six- to sevenfold higher OUD/overdose risk. Breast cancer survivors at high-risk of OUD/overdose may benefit from targeted interventions (e.g., pain clinic referral).

Reducing perceived barriers to scaling up overdose education and naloxone distribution and medications for opioid use disorder in the United States in the HEALing (helping end addiction long-term®) communities study.

BACKGROUND: Scaling up overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) and medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is needed to reduce opioid overdose deaths, but barriers are pervasive. This study examines whether the Communities That HEAL (CTH) intervention reduced perceived barriers to expanding OEND and MOUD in healthcare/behavioral health, criminal-legal, and other/non-traditional venues. METHODS: The HEALing (Helping End Addiction Long-Term®) Communities Study is a parallel, wait-list, cluster randomized trial testing the CTH intervention in 67 communities in the United States. Surveys administered to coalition members and key stakeholders measured the magnitude of perceived barriers to scaling up OEND and MOUD in November 2019-January 2020, May-June 2021, and May-June 2022. Multilevel linear mixed models compared Wave 1 (intervention) and Wave 2 (wait-list control) respondents. Interactions by rural/urban status and research site were tested. RESULTS: Wave 1 respondents reported significantly greater reductions in mean scores for three outcomes: perceived barriers to scaling up OEND in Healthcare/Behavioral Health Venues (-0.26, 95% confidence interval, CI: -0.48, -0.05, p = 0.015), OEND in Other/Non-traditional Venues (-0.53, 95% CI: - 0.84, -0.22, p = 0.001) and MOUD in Other/Non-traditional Venues (-0.34, 95% CI: -0.62, -0.05, p = 0.020). There were significant interactions by research site for perceived barriers to scaling up OEND and MOUD in Criminal-Legal Venues. There were no significant interactions by rural/urban status. DISCUSSION: The CTH Intervention reduced perceived barriers to scaling up OEND and MOUD in certain venues, with no difference in effectiveness between rural and urban communities. More research is needed to understand facilitators and barriers in different venues.

Reducing the Likelihood of Opioid Overdose Fatalities on College and University Campuses: An Action Plan and Model.

For more than two decades there has been a continuous rise in opioid overdose related deaths. The majority of the deaths include the age range when, traditionally, individuals are likely to attend college or university. As a result, Vassar College has taken the important initiative and created and implemented a new opioid overdose intervention strategy and action plan called AED+. AED+ expands on the Model of Greater Awareness, Training and Increased Availability of and Accessibility to Life Saving Intervention Devices; a model that was created based on AED devices improving outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest emergencies. Similar to AED's improving out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes, the + component of the AED+ initiative increases awareness and provides basic, targeted education about naloxone and its use. Furthermore, the education includes information about naloxone's greater availability and its more immediate access across the campus by students, staff, faculty, administrators, and visitors in the event of a suspected opioid overdose. Starting in May 2023, members of the school's Health Service and senior administrative leaders identified it necessary to be proactive and not reactive to managing an opioid overdose in the campus community. Although Vassar College has not recently experienced an opioid overdose, it is confidently projected that these targeted actions will proactively and positively reduce the likelihood of opioid-related fatalities on campus. Furthermore, it is the purpose of this article to share the AED+ model so other colleges and universities can modify it to best fit their unique setting in order to improve opioid overdose outcomes.

High-dose naloxone formulations are not as essential as we thought.

Naloxone is an effective FDA-approved opioid antagonist for reversing opioid overdoses. Naloxone is available to the public and can be administered through intramuscular (IM), intravenous (IV), and intranasal spray (IN) routes. Our literature review investigates the adequacy of two doses of standard IM or IN naloxone in reversing fentanyl overdoses compared to newer high-dose naloxone formulations. Moreover, our initiative incorporates the experiences of people who use drugs, enabling a more practical and contextually-grounded analysis. The evidence indicates that the vast majority of fentanyl overdoses can be successfully reversed using two standard IM or IN dosages. Exceptions include cases of carfentanil overdose, which necessitates ≥ 3 doses for reversal. Multiple studies documented the risk of precipitated withdrawal using ≥ 2 doses of naloxone, notably including the possibility of recurring overdose symptoms after resuscitation, contingent upon the half-life of the specific opioid involved. We recommend distributing multiple doses of standard IM or IN naloxone to bystanders and educating individuals on the adequacy of two doses in reversing fentanyl overdoses. Individuals should continue administration until the recipient is revived, ensuring appropriate intervals between each dose along with rescue breaths, and calling emergency medical services if the individual is unresponsive after two doses. We do not recommend high-dose naloxone formulations as a substitute for four doses of IM or IN naloxone due to the higher cost, risk of precipitated withdrawal, and limited evidence compared to standard doses. Future research must take into consideration lived and living experience, scientific evidence, conflicts of interest, and the bodily autonomy of people who use drugs.

Feeling safer: effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of continuous pulse oximetry for people who smoke opioids at overdose prevention services in British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is the most common mode of unregulated opioid consumption overall and implicated in fatal overdoses in British Columbia (BC). In part, perception of decreased risk (e.g., fewer who smoke carry naloxone kits) and limited smoking-specific harm reduction services contribute to overdose deaths. Overdose prevention services (OPS) offer supervised settings for drug use. Continuous pulse oximetry, common in acute care, allows real-time, remote oxygen monitoring. We evaluated the effectiveness of a novel continuous pulse oximetry protocol aimed at allowing physical distancing (as required by COVID-19, secluded spaces, and to avoid staff exposure to vaporized opioids), its feasibility, and acceptability at OPS for people who smoke opioids. METHODS: This was a mixed methods survey study. We developed a continuous pulse oximetry protocol in collaboration with clinical experts and people with lived/living experience of substance use. We implemented our protocol from March to August 2021 at four OPS in BC permitting smoking. We included adults (≥ 18 years) presenting to OPS to smoke opioids. Peer researchers collected demographic, health, and substance use information, and conducted structured observations. OPS clients participating in our study, OPS staff, and peer researchers completed post-monitoring surveys. We analyzed responses using a thematic inductive approach and validated themes with peer researchers. RESULTS: We included 599 smoking events. OPS clients participating in our study had a mean age of 38.5 years; 73% were male. Most (98%) reported using "down", heroin, or fentanyl; 48% concurrently used other substances (32% of whom reported stimulants); 76% reported smoking alone in the last 3 days; and 36% reported an overdose while smoking. Respondents reported that the protocol facilitated physical distancing, was easy to use, high satisfaction, improved confidence, improved sense of safety, and that they would use it again. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous pulse oximetry allowed safe physical distancing, was feasible, and acceptable in monitoring people who smoke opioids at OPS.

"Naloxone? Not for me!" First cross-assessment by patients and healthcare professionals of the risk of opioid overdose.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-related mortality is a rising public health concern in France, where opioids were in 2021 implicated in 75% of overdose deaths. Opioid substitution treatment (OST) was implicated in almost half of deaths related to substance and drug abuse. Although naloxone could prevent 80% of these deaths, there are a number of barriers to the distribution of take-home naloxone (THN) among opioid users in France. This study is the first one which compares patients' self-assessment of the risk of future opioid overdose with the hetero-assessment provided by healthcare professionals in a population of individuals eligible for naloxone. METHODS: This was a multicenter descriptive observational study carried out in pharmacies across the Pays de la Loire region (France) during April and May 2022. All adult patients who visited a participating pharmacy for a prescription of OST and provided oral informed consent were enrolled in the study. Retrospective data were collected through cross-sectional interviews conducted by the pharmacist with the patient, utilizing an ad hoc questionnaire. The patient's self-assessment of overdose risk was evaluated using a Likert scale from 0 to 10. The pharmacist relied on the presence or absence of overdose risk situations defined by the French Health Authority (HAS). The need to hold THN was assessed using a composite criterion. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients were interviewed; near one third were aware of the existence of THN and a minority had THN in their possession. Out of the 34 participants, 29 assessed their own risk of future opioid overdose: 65.5% reported having zero risk, while 6.9% believed they had a high risk. Nevertheless, at least one risk situation of opioid overdose was identified according to HAS criteria in 73.5% of the participants (n = 25). Consequently, 55% of the participants underestimated their risk of experiencing a future opioid overdose. Yet, dispensing THN has been judged necessary for 88.2% of the participants. CONCLUSION: This study underscored the imperative need to inform not only healthcare professionals but also the patients and users themselves on the availability of THN and the risk situations of opioid overdose.

Physiologic oxygen responses to smoking opioids: an observational study using continuous pulse oximetry at overdose prevention services in British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: In British Columbia, Canada, smoking is the most common modality of drug use among people who die of opioid toxicity. We aimed to assess oxygen saturation (SpO2) while people smoked opioids during a pilot study that introduced continuous pulse oximetry at overdose prevention services (OPS) sites. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study, using a participatory design. We implemented our monitoring protocol from March to August 2021 at four OPS. We included adults (≥ 18 years) presenting to smoke opioids. A sensor taped to participants' fingers transmitted real-time SpO2 readings to a remote monitor viewed by OPS staff. Peer researchers collected baseline data and observed the timing of participants' inhalations. We analyzed SpO2 on a per-event basis. In mixed-effects logistic regression models, drop in minimum SpO2 ≤ 90% in the current minute was our main outcome variable. Inhalation in that same minute was our main predictor. We also examined inhalation in the previous minute, cumulative inhalations, inhalation rate, demographics, co-morbidities, and substance use variables. RESULTS: We recorded 599 smoking events; 72.8% (436/599) had analyzable SpO2 data. Participants' mean age was 38.6 years (SD 11.3 years) and 73.1% were male. SpO2 was highly variable within and between individuals. Drop in SpO2 ≤ 90% was not significantly associated with inhalation in that same minute (OR: 1.2 [0.8-1.78], p = 0.261) or inhalation rate (OR 0.47 [0.20-1.10], p = 0.082). There was an association of SpO2 drop with six cumulative inhalations (OR 3.38 [1.04-11.03], p = 0.043); this was not maintained ≥ 7 inhalations. Demographics, co-morbidities, and drug use variables were non-contributory. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous pulse oximetry SpO2 monitoring is a safe adjunct to monitoring people who smoke opioids at OPS. Our data reflect challenges of real-world monitoring, indicating that greater supports are needed for frontline responders at OPS. Inconsistent association between inhalations and SpO2 suggests that complex factors (e.g., inhalation depth/duration, opioid tolerance, drug use setting) contribute to hypoxemia and overdose risk while people smoke opioids.

Association of Fentanyl Test Strip Use, Perceived Overdose Risk, and Naloxone Possession among People Who Use Drugs.

Background: As opioid overdoses continue rising, interventions are needed to expand naloxone carriage, an opioid overdose reversal agent. Use of fentanyl test strips (FTS) might promote naloxone carriage. This study examines the relationship between FTS use, perceived overdose risk, and naloxone carriage in Wisconsin, United States. Methods: In a survey of people who use drugs (n = 341) in southern Wisconsin, respondents were asked about FTS use, perceived overdose risk, and how often they (1) have naloxone, (2) have more than one dose of naloxone, and (3) the number of naloxone doses possessed currently. Likert responses were mapped to an integer scale. Ordinal and linear multivariable regression examined the relationship between FTS use and study outcomes while adjusting for respondent characteristics. Results: Most respondents were male (59.6%), identified heroin as their drug of choice (70.7%) and reported intravenous use (87.9%). In unadjusted models, FTS use was associated with more often having naloxone (OR: 2.10; p = 0.005), more often having multiple naloxone doses (OR: 2.98; p < 0.001), and possessing a greater number of naloxone doses (dose count difference: 2.85; p = 0.001). In adjusted models, FTS use was associated with more often having multiple naloxone doses (OR: 2.29; p = 0.005) and possessing a greater number of naloxone doses (dose count difference: 2.25, p = 0.020). Conclusions: Individuals who use FTS more often carry multiple doses relative to individuals who do not use FTS. Given that naloxone carriage is critical for reducing opioid overdose risk, expanding FTS use may offer a strategy to reduce opioid overdose rates via improved naloxone carriage.

Prescription Opioid Diversion Sources Among African Americans: Implications for Overdose Prevention.

Recent data show that African Americans (AAs) experienced a greater increase in overdose deaths involving prescription opioids relative to other racial/ethnic groups. One possible mechanism through which elevated risk for overdose is conferred to AAs could be due to greater exposure to contaminated counterfeit pills. Unfortunately, prescription opioid diversion is understudied among AAs and less is known regarding which sources AAs use to access pharmaceutical opioids. The objective of this study, therefore, was to identify and describe the most commonly used diversion sources for prescription opioids among AAs. Qualitative interview data are also presented to contextualize the most prevalent sources. This study used data from the Florida Minority Health Study, a mixed-methods project that included online surveys (n = 303) and qualitative in-depth interviews (n = 30) of AAs. Data collection was conducted from August 2021 to February 2022 throughout Southwest Florida. Analyses revealed that the most widely used sources for prescription opioids were dealers (33.0%) and friends/relatives (34.7%). Additionally, interview data indicated that dealers are the access point where larger volume acquisitions are made and high potency formulations are accessed. These findings suggest that AAs may utilize nonhealthcare related sources at higher rates than healthcare related sources to acquire prescription opioids. This is concerning because opioid pills acquired through nonhealthcare related sources are especially susceptible to fentanyl adulteration. These findings invite further study using nationally representative data to determine if AAs disproportionately use nonhealthcare related sources compared to persons from other racial/ethnic groups.

Opioid Overdoses and Take-Home Naloxone Interventions: Ethnographic Evidence for Individual-Level Barriers to Treatment of Opioid Use Disorders in Rural Appalachia.

Introduction: Research indicates that take-home naloxone (THN) is saving lives across rural Appalachia, but whether it also results in treatment for opioid use disorders (OUDs) remains unclear. This study involves a detailed qualitative analysis of interviews with 16 individuals who had overdosed on opioids 61 times to understand why a THN intervention does not routinely lead to OUD treatment. Methods: This study builds upon a one-year (2018) qualitative study on community responses to opioid overdose fatalities in four adjacent rural counties in Western Pennsylvania. Using a semi-structured interview guide, 16 individuals who had experienced one or more overdoses were interviewed. Using NVivo, the transcribed audio-recorded interviews were coded, and a thematic analysis of the coded text was conducted. Findings: Findings reveal that of the 29 overdoses that included a THN intervention, only eight resulted in treatment. The analysis derives five individual-level barriers to treatment: (1) opioid dependence, (2) denial/readiness, (3) opioid withdrawal fears, (4) incarceration concerns, and (5) stigma and shame. These barriers impeded treatment, even though all the interviewees knew of treatment programs, how to access them, and in some cases had undergone treatment previously. Discussion and Conclusion: findings indicate that there is evidence that the five barriers make entering treatment after a THN intervention challenging and seemingly insurmountable at times. Recommendations based on the findings include increasing efforts to reduce stigma of OUDs in the community, including self-stigma resulting from misusing opioids, increasing informational efforts about Good Samaritan Laws, and increasing familiarity with medication-assisted treatments for OUDS.

A systematic review exploring healthcare professionals' perceptions of take-home naloxone dispensing in acute care areas.

AIMS: To explore healthcare professionals' perceptions and experiences of take-home naloxone initiatives in acute care settings to gain an understanding of issues facilitating or impeding dispensing. DESIGN: Systematic literature review. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane, MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched from 15/03/2021 to 18/03/2021, with a follow-up search performed via PubMed on 22/03/2021. The years 2011 to 2021 were included in the search. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic literature review focused on qualitative studies and quantitative survey designs. Synthesis without meta-analysis was undertaken using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Seven articles from the United States of America (5), Australia (1) and Canada (1) with 750 participants were included in the review. Results indicate ongoing stigma towards people who use drugs with preconceived moral concerns regarding take-home naloxone. There was confusion regarding roles and responsibilities in take-home naloxone dispensing and patient education. Similarly, there was a lack of clarity over logistical and financial issues. CONCLUSION: Take-home naloxone is a vital harm reduction initiative. However, barriers exist that prevent the optimum implementation of these initiatives. IMPACT: What is already known: Deaths due to opioid overdose are a global health concern, with take-home naloxone emerging as a key harm reduction scheme. Globally, less than 10% of people who use drugs have access to treatment initiatives, including take-home naloxone. An optimum point of distribution of take-home naloxone is post-acute hospital care. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: There is role confusion regarding responsibility for the provision of take-home naloxone and patient education. This is exacerbated by inconsistent provision of training and education for healthcare professionals. Logistical or financial concerns are common and moral issues are prevalent with some healthcare professionals questioning the ethics of providing take-home naloxone. Stigma towards people who use drugs remains evident in some acute care areas which may impact the use of this intervention. Implications for practice/policy: Further primary research should examine what training and education methods are effective in improving the distribution of take-home naloxone in acute care. Education should focus on reduction of stigma towards people who use drugs to improve the distribution of take-home naloxone. Standardized care guidelines may ensure interventions are offered equally and take-home naloxone 'champions' could drive initiatives forward, with support from harm reduction specialists. REPORTING METHOD: This has adhered to the PRISMA reporting guidelines for systematic reviews. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Systemized approach to equipping medical students with naloxone: a student-driven initiative to combat the opioid crisis.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone is an effective and safe opioid reversal medication now approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use with or without a prescription. Despite this, naloxone dissemination lags at a time when U.S. opioid-related mortality expands. The authors proposed distributing naloxone to all U.S. medical students using established statewide standing prescription orders for naloxone, eliminating the financial burden of over-the-counter costs on students and streamlining workflow for the pharmacy. By focusing naloxone distribution on medical students, we are able to capitalize on a group that is already primed on healthcare intervention, while also working to combat stigma in the emerging physician workforce. METHODS: Beginning August 2022, the authors established a partnership between Harvard Medical School (HMS) and the outpatient pharmacy at Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) to facilitate access to naloxone for HMS medical students. BWH developed a HIPAA-secure electronic form to collect individual prescription information. BWH pharmacists processed submissions daily, integrating the naloxone prescription requests into their workflow for in-person pick-up or mail-order delivery. The electronic form was disseminated to medical students through a required longitudinal addiction medicine curriculum, listserv messaging, and an extracurricular harm reduction workshop. RESULTS: Over the 2022-2023 academic year, 63 medical students obtained naloxone kits (two doses per kit) through this collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that medical schools advocate for a hospital pharmacy-initiated workflow focused on convenience and accessibility to expand naloxone access to medical students as a strategy to strengthen the U.S. emergency response and prevention efforts aimed at reducing opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Expansion of our program to BWH internal medicine residents increased our distribution to over 110 healthcare workers, and efforts to expand the program to other BWH training programs and clinical sites such as the emergency department and outpatient infectious disease clinics are underway. With more than 90,000 medical students in the U.S., we believe that widespread implementation of targeted naloxone training and distribution to this population is an accessible approach to combating the public health crisis of opioid-related overdoses.

Emergency Department Take-Home Naloxone Improves Access Compared with Pharmacy-Dispensed Naloxone.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose is a major cause of mortality in the United States. In spite of efforts to increase naloxone availability, distribution to high-risk populations remains a challenge. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of multiple different naloxone distribution methods on patient obtainment of naloxone in the emergency department (ED) setting. METHODS: Naloxone was provided to patients in three 12-month phases between February 2020 and February 2023. In Phase 1, physicians could offer patients electronic prescriptions, which were filled in a nearby in-hospital discharge pharmacy. In Phase 2, physicians directly provided patients with take-home naloxone at discharge. In Phase 3, distribution was expanded to allow ED staff to hand patients take-home naloxone at time of discharge. The total number of prescriptions, rate of prescription filling, and amount of take-home naloxone kits provided to patients were then statistically analyzed using 95% confidence intervals (CI) and chi-squared testing. RESULTS: In Phase 1, 348 naloxone prescriptions were written, with 133 (95% CI 112.5-153.5) filled. In Phase 2, 327 (95% CI 245.5-408.5) take-home naloxone kits were given to patients by physicians. In Phase 3, 677 (95% CI 509.5-844.5) take-home naloxone kits were provided to patients by ED staff. There were statistically significant increases in naloxone distribution from Phase 1 to Phase 2, and Phase 2 to Phase 3. CONCLUSIONS: Take-home naloxone increases access when compared with naloxone prescriptions in the ED setting. A multidisciplinary approach combined with the removal of regulatory and administrative barriers allowed for further increased distribution of no-cost naloxone to patients.

Community Collaboration for Suicide and Overdose Prevention: Attitudes, Perceptions, and Practices of Community-Based Professionals and County Leadership in New York State.

Deaths by overdose and suicide have been steadily rising, yet efforts to jointly address them have been limited despite shared risk and protective factors. The purpose of this study was to explore ways of jointly addressing these two significant public health issues at the community level. To accomplish this goal, we distributed an electronic survey via email to all 58 Local Mental Hygiene Directors (LMHDs) and 184 substance use and 57 suicide prevention coalition leads in New York State in March 2019 to better understand attitudes, perceptions, and practice of community-based overdose and suicide prevention. A total of 140 unique individuals completed the survey for a 47% usable response rate. Participants overwhelmingly reported that suicide and overdose are preventable and that individuals with risky substance use would benefit most from suicide prevention services compared to other populations. In addition, substance use prevention coalition leads reported less awareness of key suicide prevention programs than suicide prevention coalition leads and LMHDs; LMHDs were generally most familiar with suicide prevention programs. Finally, substance use and suicide prevention coalition leads were interested in collaborating to raise awareness, provide training, and implement community-based activities. These findings demonstrate a consensus among county leadership and substance use and suicide prevention coalition leads that suicide and overdose are prevalent in their communities and that increased collaboration to address these two public health issues is warranted. Results suggest a need for education, training, and technical assistance to support collaboration.

From Friend to Foe: A Case of Naloxone-Induced Pulmonary Edema.

Naloxone, an opioid receptor antagonist, effectively reverses opioid overdose and opioid-induced respiratory depression. A few side effects were reported after naloxone administration, including arrhythmia and pulmonary edema. Although rare, naloxone-induced pulmonary edema can be a severe and sometimes life-threatening complication requiring mechanical ventilation. This condition is predominantly linked to an upsurge in catecholamines after opioid reversal as part of acute withdrawal syndrome, especially seen in patients who chronically use opioids. In this report, we present a case of a 66-year-old patient who developed pulmonary edema following the administration of multiple doses of intravenous and intranasal naloxone for opioid overdose. This case highlights the potential adverse effects associated with naloxone use and discusses how to employ this life-saving medication with minimal side effects.

Update of a Multivariable Opioid Overdose Risk Prediction Model to Enhance Clinical Care for Long-term Opioid Therapy Patients.

BACKGROUND: Clinical opioid overdose risk prediction models can be useful tools to reduce the risk of overdose in patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT). However, evolving overdose risk environments and clinical practices in addition to potential harmful model misapplications require careful assessment prior to widespread implementation into clinical care. Models may need to be tailored to meet local clinical operational needs and intended applications in practice. OBJECTIVE: To update and validate an existing opioid overdose risk model, the Kaiser Permanente Colorado Opioid Overdose (KPCOOR) Model, in patients prescribed LTOT for implementation in clinical care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The retrospective cohort study consisted of 33, 625 patients prescribed LTOT between January 2015 and June 2019 at Kaiser Permanente Colorado, with follow-up through June 2021. MAIN MEASURES: The outcome consisted of fatal opioid overdoses identified from vital records and non-fatal opioid overdoses from emergency department and inpatient settings. Predictors included demographics, medication dispensings, substance use disorder history, mental health history, and medical diagnoses. Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to model 2-year overdose risk. KEY RESULTS: During follow-up, 65 incident opioid overdoses were observed (111.4 overdoses per 100,000 person-years) in the study cohort, of which 11 were fatal. The optimal risk model needed to risk-stratify patients and to be easily interpreted by clinicians. The original 5-variable model re-validated on the new study cohort had a bootstrap-corrected C-statistic of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.64-0.85) compared to a C-statistic of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.70-0.88) in the updated model and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.66-0.87) in the final adapted 7-variable model, which was also well-calibrated. CONCLUSIONS: Updating and adapting predictors for opioid overdose in the KPCOOR Model with input from clinical partners resulted in a parsimonious and clinically relevant model that was poised for integration in clinical care.

Prescription Opioid Dose Reductions and Potential Adverse Events: a Multi-site Observational Cohort Study in Diverse US Health Systems.

BACKGROUND: In response to the opioid crisis in the United States, population-level prescribing of opioids has been decreasing; there are concerns, however, that dose reductions are related to potential adverse events. OBJECTIVE: Examine associations between opioid dose reductions and risk of 1-month potential adverse events (emergency department (ED) visits, opioid overdose, benzodiazepine prescription fill, all-cause mortality). DESIGN: This observational cohort study used electronic health record and claims data from eight United States health systems in a prescription opioid registry (Clinical Trials Network-0084). All opioid fills (excluding buprenorphine) between 1/1/2012 and 12/31/2018 were used to identify baseline periods with mean morphine milligram equivalents daily dose of  ≥ 50 during six consecutive months. PATIENTS: We identified 60,040 non-cancer patients with  ≥ one 2-month dose reduction period (600,234 unique dose reduction periods). MAIN MEASURES: Analyses examined associations between dose reduction levels (1- < 15%, 15- < 30%, 30- < 100%, 100% over 2 months) and potential adverse events in the month following a dose reduction using logistic regression analysis, adjusting for patient characteristics. KEY RESULTS: Overall, dose reduction periods involved mean reductions of 18.7%. Compared to reductions of 1- < 15%, dose reductions of 30- < 100% were associated with higher odds of ED visits (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.10, 1.17), opioid overdose (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.09-1.81), and all-cause mortality (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.16-1.67), but lower odds of a benzodiazepine fill (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.81-0.85). Dose reductions of 15- < 30%, compared to 1- < 15%, were associated with higher odds of ED visits (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05-1.11) and lower odds of a benzodiazepine fill (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.92-0.95), but were not associated with opioid overdose and all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Larger reductions for patients on opioid therapy may raise risk of potential adverse events in the month after reduction and should be carefully monitored.

Methods for jurisdictional vulnerability assessment of opioid-related outcomes.

In 2020, an estimated 2.7 million people in the US had opioid use disorder, increasing their risk of opioid-related morbidity and mortality. While jurisdictional vulnerability assessments (JVA) of opioid-related outcomes have been conducted previously in the US, there has been no unifying methodological framework. Between 2019 and 2021, we prepared ten JVAs, in collaboration with the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and state public health agencies, to evaluate the risk for opioid-involved overdose (OOD) fatalities and related consequences. Our aim is to share the framework we developed for these ten JVAs, based on our study of the work of Van Handel et al. from 2016, as well as a summary of 18 publicly available assessments of OOD or associated hepatitis C virus infection vulnerability. We developed a three-tiered framework that can be applied by jurisdictions based on the number of units of analysis (e.g., counties, ZIP Codes, census tracts): under 10 (Tier 1), 10 to <50 (Tier 2), and 50 or more (Tier 3). We calculated OOD vulnerability indices based on variable ranks, weighted variable ranks, or multivariable regressions, respectively, for the three tiers. We developed thematic maps, conducted spatial analyses, and visualized service provider locations, drive-time service areas, and service accessibility relative to OOD risk. The methodological framework and examples of our findings from several jurisdictions can be used as a foundation for future assessments and help inform policies to mitigate the impact of the opioid overdose crisis.

Risks of opioid overdose among New York State Medicaid recipients with chronic pain before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic contributed to healthcare disruptions for patients with chronic pain. Following initial disruptions, national policies were enacted to expand access to long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain and opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment services, which may have modified risk of opioid overdose. We examined associations between LTOT and/or OUD with fatal and non-fatal opioid overdoses, and whether the pandemic moderated overdose risk in these groups. METHODS: We analyzed New York State Medicaid claims data (3/1/2019-12/31/20) of patients with chronic pain (N = 236,391). We used generalized estimating equations models to assess associations between LTOT and/or OUD (neither LTOT or OUD [ref], LTOT only, OUD only, and LTOT and OUD) and the pandemic (03/2020-12/2020) with opioid overdose. RESULTS: The pandemic did not significantly (ns) affect opioid overdose among patients with LTOT and/or OUD. While patients with LTOT (vs. no LTOT) had a slight increase in opioid overdose during the pandemic (pre-pandemic: aOR:1.65, 95% CI:1.05, 2.57; pandemic: aOR:2.43, CI:1.75,3.37, ns), patients with OUD had a slightly attenuated odds of overdose during the pandemic (pre-pandemic: aOR:5.65, CI:4.73, 6.75; pandemic: aOR:5.16, CI:4.33, 6.14, ns). Patients with both LTOT and OUD also experienced a slightly reduced odds of opioid overdose during the pandemic (pre-pandemic: aOR:5.82, CI:3.58, 9.44; pandemic: aOR:3.70, CI:2.11, 6.50, ns). CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrated no significant effect of the pandemic on opioid overdose among people with chronic pain and LTOT and/or OUD, suggesting pandemic policies expanding access to chronic pain and OUD treatment services may have mitigated the risk of opioid overdose.

Creation and Validation of a New Socio-built Environment Index Measure of Opioid Overdose Risk for Use in Both Non-urban and Urban Settings.

A great deal of literature has examined features of the physical built environment as predictors of opioid overdose and other substance use-related outcomes. Other literature suggests that social characteristics of settings are important predictors of substance use outcomes. However, there is a dearth of literature simultaneously measuring both physical and social characteristics of settings in an effort to better predict opioid overdose. There is also a dearth of literature examining built environment as a predictor of overdose in non-urban settings. The present study presents a novel socio-built environment index measure of opioid overdose risk comprised of indicators measuring both social and physical characteristics of settings - and developed for use in both urban and non-urban settings - and assesses its validity among 565 urban, suburban, and rural New Jersey municipalities. We found that this novel measure had good convergent validity, based on significant positive associations with a social vulnerability index and crime rates, and significant negative associations with a municipal revitalization index and high school graduation rates. The index measure had good discriminant validity, based on lack of association with three different racial isolation indices. Finally, our index measure had good health outcome-based criterion validity, based on significant positive associations with recent overdose mortality. There were no major differences between rural, suburban, and urban municipalities in validity analysis findings. This promising new socio-built environment risk index measure could improve ability to target and allocate resources to settings with the greatest risk, in order to improve their impact on overdose outcomes.