National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network Meeting Report: Managing Patients Exposed to Xylazine-Adulterated Opioids in Emergency, Hospital and Addiction Care Settings.

Used as a veterinary sedative and not approved for human use, xylazine has been increasingly linked with opioid overdose deaths in the United States. A growing number of people have been exposed to xylazine in the illicit opioid supply (especially fentanyl) or in other drugs, particularly in some areas of the Northeast. Xylazine is an α-2 adrenergic agonist that decreases sympathetic nervous system activity. When combined with fentanyl or heroin, it is purported to extend the duration of the opioid's sedative effect and to cause dependence and an associated withdrawal syndrome; however, data to support these concerns are limited. Despite the escalating frequency of detection of xylazine in people with nonfatal and fatal opioid overdose, direct links to these outcomes have not been identified. Because the strongest causal link is to fentanyl coexposure, ventilatory support and naloxone remain the cornerstones of overdose management. Xylazine is also associated with severe tissue injury, including skin ulcers and tissue loss, but little is known about the underlying mechanisms. Nonetheless, strategies for prevention and treatment are emerging. The significance and clinical effects of xylazine as an adulterant is focused on 4 domains that merit further evaluation: fentanyl-xylazine overdose, xylazine dependence and withdrawal, xylazine-associated dermal manifestations, and xylazine surveillance and detection in clinical and nonclinical settings. This report reflects the Proceedings of the National Institute on Drug Abuse Center for the Clinical Trials Network convening of clinical and scientific experts, federal staff, and other stakeholders to describe emerging best practices for treating people exposed to xylazine-adulterated opioids. Participants identified scientific gaps and opportunities for research to inform clinical practice in emergency departments, hospitals, and addiction medicine settings.

LungCARE: Encouraging Shared Decision-Making in Lung Cancer Screening-a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening (LCS) is recommended for individuals at high risk due to age and smoking history after a shared decision-making conversation. However, little is known about best strategies for incorporating shared decision-making, especially in a busy primary care setting. OBJECTIVE: To develop a novel tool, Lung Cancer Assessment of Risk and Education (LungCARE) to guide LCS decisions among eligible primary care patients. DESIGN: Pilot cluster randomized controlled trial of LungCARE versus usual care. PARTICIPANTS: Patients of providers in a university primary care clinic, who met criteria for LCS. INTERVENTION: Providers were randomized to LungCARE intervention or control. LungCARE participants completed a computer tablet-based video assessment of lung cancer educational needs in the waiting room prior to a primary care visit. Patient and provider both received a summary handout of patient concerns and responses. MAIN MEASURES: All eligible patients completed baseline interviews by telephone. One week after the index visit, participants completed a follow-up telephone survey that assessed patient-physician discussion of LCS, referral to and scheduling of LCS, as well as LCS knowledge and acceptability of LungCARE. Two months after index visit, we reviewed patients' electronic health records (EHRs) for evidence of a shared decision-making conversation and referral to and receipt of LCS. KEY RESULTS: A total of 66 participants completed baseline and follow-up visits (34: LungCARE; 32: usual care). Mean age was 65.9 (± 6.0). Based on EHR review, compared to usual care, LungCARE participants were more likely to have discussed LCS with their physicians (56% vs 25%; p = 0.04) and to be referred to LCS (44% vs 13%; p < 0.02). Intervention participants were also more likely to complete LCS (32% vs 13%; p < 0.01) and had higher knowledge scores (mean score 6.5 (± 1.7) vs 5.5 (± 1.4; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: LungCARE increased discussion, referral, and completion of LCS and improved LCS knowledge. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03862001.

Impact of Universal Screening and Automated Clinical Decision Support for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder in Emergency Departments: A Difference-in-Differences Analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine improves outcomes in patients with opioid use disorder; however, adoption varies widely. To reduce variability, we implemented a nurse-driven triage screening question in the electronic health record to identify patients with opioid use disorder, followed by targeted electronic health record prompts to measure withdrawal and guide next steps in management, including initiation of treatment. Our objective was to assess the impact of screening implementation in 3 urban, academic EDs. METHODS: We conducted a quasiexperimental study of opioid use disorder-related ED visits using electronic health record data from January 2020 to June 2022. The triage protocol was implemented in 3 EDs between March and July 2021, and 2 other EDs in the health system served as controls. We evaluated changes in treatment measures over time and used a difference-in-differences analysis to compare outcomes in the 3 intervention EDs with those in the 2 controls. RESULTS: There were 2,462 visits in the intervention hospitals (1,258 in the preperiod and 1,204 in the postperiod) and 731 in the control hospitals (459 in the preperiod and 272 in the postperiod). Patient characteristics within the intervention and control EDs were similar across the time periods. Compared with the control hospitals, the triage protocol was associated with a 17% greater increase in withdrawal assessment, using the Clinical Opioid Withdrawal Scale (COWS) (95% CI 7 to 27). Buprenorphine prescriptions at discharge also increased by 5% (95% CI 0% to 10%), and naloxone prescriptions increased by 12% points (95% CI 1% to 22%) in the intervention EDs relative to controls. CONCLUSION: An ED triage screening and treatment protocol led to increased assessment and treatment of opioid use disorder. Protocols designed to make screening and treatment the default practice have promise in increasing the implementation of evidence-based treatment ED opioid use disorder care.

Variability in opioid use disorder clinical presentations and treatment in the emergency department: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: There is strong evidence for emergency department (ED)-initiated treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). However, implementation is variable, and ED management of OUD may differ by clinical presentation. Our aim was to use mixed methods to explore variation in ED-based OUD care by patient clinical presentation and understand barriers and facilitators to ED implementation of OUD treatment across scenarios. METHODS: We analyzed treatment outcomes in OUD-related visits within three urban, academic EDs from 12/2018 to 7/2020 following the implementation of interventions to increase ED-initiated OUD treatment. We assessed differences in treatment with medications for OUD (MOUDs) by clinical presentation (overdose, withdrawal, others). These data were integrated with results from 5 focus groups conducted with 28 ED physicians and nurses January to April 2020 to provide a richer understanding of clinician perspectives on caring for ED patients with OUD. RESULTS: Of the 1339 total opioid-related visits, there were 265 (20%) visits for overdose, 123 (9%) for withdrawal, and 951 (71%) for other OUD-related conditions. 23% of patients received MOUDs during their visit or at discharge. Treatment with MOUDs was least common in overdose presentations (6%) and most common in withdrawal presentations (69%, p < 0.001). Buprenorphine was prescribed at discharge in 15% of visits, including 42% of withdrawal visits, 14% of other OUD-related visits, and 5% of overdose visits (p < 0.001). In focus groups, clinicians highlighted variation in ED presentations among patients with OUD. Clinicians also highlighted key aspects necessary for successful treatment initiation including perceived patient receptivity, provider confidence, and patient clinical readiness. CONCLUSIONS: ED-based treatment of OUD differed by clinical presentation. Clinician focus groups identified several areas where targeted guidance or novel approaches may improve current practices. These results highlight the need for tailored clinical guidance and can inform health system and policy interventions seeking to increase ED-initiated treatment for OUD.

Sustained Implementation of a Multicomponent Strategy to Increase Emergency Department-Initiated Interventions for Opioid Use Disorder.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: There is strong evidence supporting emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine for opioid use disorder, but less is known about how to implement this practice. Our aim was to describe implementation, maintenance, and provider adoption of a multicomponent strategy for opioid use disorder treatment in 3 urban, academic EDs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of electronic health record data for adult patients with opioid use disorder-related visits before (March 2017 to November 2018) and after (December 2018 to July 2020) implementation. We describe patient characteristics, clinical treatment, and process measures over time and conducted an interrupted time series analysis using a patient-level multivariable logistic regression model to assess the association of the interventions with buprenorphine use and other outcomes. Finally, we report provider-level variation in prescribing after implementation. RESULTS: There were 2,665 opioid use disorder-related visits during the study period: 28% for overdose, 8% for withdrawal, and 64% for other conditions. Thirteen percent of patients received medications for opioid use disorder during or after their ED visit overall. Following intervention implementation, there were sustained increases in treatment and process measures, with a net increase in total buprenorphine of 20% in the postperiod (95% confidence interval 16% to 23%). In the adjusted patient-level model, there was an immediate increase in the probability of buprenorphine treatment of 24.5% (95% confidence interval 12.1% to 37.0%) with intervention implementation. Seventy percent of providers wrote at least 1 buprenorphine prescription, but provider-level buprenorphine prescribing ranged from 0% to 61% of opioid use disorder-related encounters. CONCLUSION: A combination of strategies to increase ED-initiated opioid use disorder treatment was associated with sustained increases in treatment and process measures. However, adoption varied widely among providers, suggesting that additional strategies are needed for broader uptake.

Substance Use and Overdose in Public Libraries: Results from a Five-State Survey in the US.

In the U.S., overdoses have become a health crisis in both public and private places. We describe the impact of the overdose crisis in public libraries across five U.S. states, and the front-line response of public library workers. We conducted a cross-sectional survey, inviting one worker to respond at each public library in five randomly selected states (CO, CT, FL, MI, and VA), querying participants regarding substance use and overdose in their communities and institutions, and their preparedness to respond. We describe substance use and overdose patterns, as well as correlates of naloxone uptake, in public libraries. Participating library staff (N = 356) reported witnessing alcohol use (45%) and injection drug use (14%) in their libraries in the previous month. Across states surveyed, 12% of respondents reported at least one on-site overdose in the prior year, ranging from a low of 10% in MI to a high of 17% in FL. There was wide variation across states in naloxone uptake at libraries, ranging from 0% of represented libraries in FL to 33% in CO. Prior on-site overdose was associated with higher odds of naloxone uptake by the library (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.1-5.7). Although 24% of respondents had attended a training regarding substance use in the prior year, over 90% of respondents wanted to receive additional training on the topic. Public health professionals should partner with public libraries to expand and strengthen substance use outreach and overdose prevention efforts.

Patient perspectives on naloxone receipt in the emergency department: a qualitative exploration.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (EDs) are important venues for the distribution of naloxone to patients at high risk of opioid overdose, but less is known about patient perceptions on naloxone or best practices for patient education and communication. Our aim was to conduct an in-depth exploration of knowledge and attitudes toward ED naloxone distribution among patients who received a naloxone prescription. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 25 adult participants seen and discharged from three urban, academic EDs in Philadelphia, PA, with a naloxone prescription between November 2020 and February 2021. Interviews focused on awareness of naloxone as well as attitudes and experiences receiving naloxone in the ED. We used thematic content analysis to identify key themes reflecting patient attitudes and experiences. RESULTS: Of the 25 participants, 72% had previously witnessed an overdose and 48% had personally experienced a non-fatal overdose. Nineteen participants (76%) self-disclosed a history of substance use or overdose, and one reported receiving an opioid prescription during their ED visit and no history of substance use. In interviews, we identified wide variability in participant levels of knowledge about overdose risk, the role of naloxone in reducing risk, and naloxone access. A subset of participants was highly engaged with community harm reduction resources and well versed in naloxone access and use. A second subset was familiar with naloxone, but largely obtained it through healthcare settings such as the ED, while a final group was largely unfamiliar with naloxone. While most participants expressed positive attitudes about receiving naloxone from the ED, the quality of discussions with ED providers was variable, with some participants not even aware they were receiving a naloxone prescription until discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Naloxone prescribing in the ED was acceptable and valued by most participants, but there are missed opportunities for communication and education. These findings underscore the critical role that EDs play in mitigating risks for patients who are not engaged with other healthcare or community health providers and can inform future work about the effective implementation of harm reduction strategies in ED settings.

Naloxone prescriptions following emergency department encounters for opioid use disorder, overdose, or withdrawal.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate at which commercially-insured patients fill prescriptions for naloxone after an opioid-related ED encounter as well as patient characteristics associated with obtaining naloxone. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of adult patients discharged from the ED following treatment for an opioid-related condition from 2016 to 2018 using a commercial insurance claims database (Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart). The primary outcome was a pharmacy claim for naloxone in the 30 days following the ED encounter. A multivariable logistic regression model examined the association of patient characteristics with filled naloxone prescriptions, and predictive margins were used to report adjusted probabilities with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: 21,700 patients had opioid-related ED encounters during the study period, of which 1743 (8.0%) had encounters for heroin overdose, 8825 (40.7%) for overdose due to other opioids, 5400 (24.9%) for withdrawal, and 5732 (26.4%) for other opioid use disorder conditions. 230 patients (1.1%) filled a prescription for naloxone within 30 days. Patients with heroin overdose (2.6%; 95%CI 1.7 to 3.4), recent prescriptions for opioid analgesics (1.4%; 95%CI 1.1 to 1.7), recent prescriptions for buprenorphine (1.9%; 95%CI 1.0 to 2.9), and naloxone prescriptions in the prior year (3.3%; 95%CI 1.8 to 4.8) were more likely to obtain naloxone. The rate was significantly higher in 2018 [1.9% (95%CI 1.5 to 2.2)] as compared to 0.4% (95%CI 0.3 to 0.6) in 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Few patients use insurance to obtain naloxone by prescription following opioid-related ED encounters. Clinical and policy interventions should expand distribution of this life-saving medication in the ED.

Telehealth for opioid use disorder treatment in low-barrier clinic settings: an exploration of clinician and staff perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The majority of individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) face access barriers to evidence-based treatment, and the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the United States (US) opioid overdose crisis. However, the pandemic has also ushered in rapid transitions to telehealth in the USA, including for substance use disorder treatment with buprenorphine. These changes have the potential to mitigate barriers to care or to exacerbate pre-existing treatment inequities. The objective of this study was to qualitatively explore Philadelphia-based low-barrier, harm-reduction oriented, opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment provider perspectives about and experiences with telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to assess their desire to offer telehealth to patients at their programs in the future. METHODS: We interviewed 22 OUD treatment prescribers and staff working outpatient programs offering OUD treatment with buprenorphine in Philadelphia during July and August 2020. All participants worked at low-barrier treatment programs that provide buprenorphine using a harm reduction-oriented approach and without mandating counseling or other requirements as a condition of treatment. We analyzed the data using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Our analysis yielded three themes: 1/ Easier access for some: telehealth facilitates care for many patients who have difficulty attending in-person appointments due to logistical and psychological barriers; 2/ A layered digital divide: engagement with telehealth can be seriously limited by patients' access to and comfort with technology; and 3/ Clinician control: despite some clinic staff beliefs that patients should have the freedom to choose their treatment modality, patients' access to treatment via telehealth may hinge on clinician perceptions of patient "stability" rather than patient preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth may address many access issues, however, barriers to implementation remain, including patient ability and desire to attend healthcare appointments virtually. In addition, the potential for telehealth models to extend OUD care to patients currently underserved by in-person models may partially depend on clinician comfort treating patients deemed "unstable" via this modality. The ability of telehealth to expand access to OUD care for individuals who have previously struggled to engage with in-person care will likely be limited if these patients are not given the opportunity to receive treatment via telehealth.

How do public libraries respond to patron queries about opioid use disorder? A secret shopper study.

Background: Improving linkage to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment and services is a public health priority. Public libraries, a community resource for health information, may be well positioned to support and guide people who use drugs, as well as their families and friends. In this study, we sought to evaluate the availability and types of resources offered to patrons inquiring about OUD information, OUD treatment, and naloxone access. Methods: We conducted an audit (secret shopper) study from April 2019 to June 2019 in which an auditor anonymously called Pennsylvania public libraries. We used a purposive sampling strategy to select libraries located in geographically diverse regions across the urban-rural continuum. We categorized responses and verified via phone or website whether referrals to treatment centers and other organizations provided OUD treatment or services. Results: We obtained responses from 100 public libraries located across 48 of the 67 counties in Pennsylvania. Among the libraries that responded, 57 provided health information resources (e.g., books, websites) and 82 provided "next step" referrals to an organization that could provide further assistance. Among the libraries that provided referrals, 39 were to treatment centers, of which 33 were specifically to treatment centers that offer medications for OUD. Of the responding libraries, 28 communicated information about naloxone access. Conclusion: Public libraries can and do connect patrons to OUD treatment and support services; however, there is wide interlibrary variation in the resources presented, demonstrating opportunities for improvement in how libraries engage and refer patrons with substance use needs.

Public libraries as partners in confronting the overdose crisis: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: The overdose crisis is affecting public libraries. In a 2017 survey of public librarians, half reported providing patrons support regarding substance use and mental health in the previous month, and 12% reported on-site drug overdose at their library in the previous year. Given the magnitude of the overdose crisis and the fact that public libraries host 1.4 billion visits annually, our aim was to understand how libraries currently assist with substance use and overdose and how they can further address these issues. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 44 public library staff from across the U.S. attending a national meeting in March 2018. Interviews addressed attitudes and experiences regarding drug use, overdose, and overdose response in libraries. We analyzed interviews using thematic content analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Results: Participants were from 26 states. Among libraries in this sample, 14% had experienced an on-site drug overdose and 7% stocked naloxone at the time of study. Nearly all participants reported substance use as a prominent concern among patrons and their families, as well as in the library itself. Many participants were willing to provide support to patrons and even administer naloxone, but they often lacked preparation, resources, or institutional support. Participants also expressed interest in providing information or referrals to people who use drugs (PWUD), but such efforts were often stymied by inadequate community resources. Finally, participants expressed interest in strengthening partnerships between public libraries and health and social service organizations. Conclusions and Relevance: Public library staff routinely engage PWUD, and based on prior studies, nearly 2,000 of U.S. public libraries can expect an on-site overdose in the next year. Findings from our work highlight the need for further study about how public libraries can act as part of comprehensive, community-based strategies to address the opioid epidemic.

Impact of a State Opioid Prescribing Limit and Electronic Medical Record Alert on Opioid Prescriptions: a Difference-in-Differences Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing limits are one policy strategy to reduce short-term opioid prescribing, but there is limited evidence of their impact. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate implementation of a state prescribing limit law and health system electronic medical record (EMR) alert on characteristics of new opioid prescriptions, refill rates, and clinical encounters. DESIGN: Difference-in-differences study comparing new opioid prescriptions from ambulatory practices in New Jersey (NJ) to controls in Pennsylvania (PA) from 1 year prior to the implementation of a NJ state prescribing limit (May 2016-May 2017) to 10 months after (May 2017-March 2018). PARTICIPANTS: Adults with new opioid prescriptions in an academic health system with practices in PA and NJ. INTERVENTIONS: State 5-day opioid prescribing limit plus health system and health system EMR alert. MAIN MEASURES: Changes in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) and tablet quantity per prescription, refills, and encounters, adjusted for patient and prescriber characteristics. KEY RESULTS: There were a total of 678 new prescriptions in NJ and 4638 in PA. Prior to the intervention, median MME/prescription was 225 mg in NJ and 150 mg in PA, and median quantity was 30 tablets in both. After implementation, median MME/prescription was 150 mg in both states, and median quantity was 20 in NJ and 30 in PA. In the adjusted model, there was a greater decrease in mean MME and tablet quantity in NJ relative to PA after implementation of the policy plus alert (- 82.99 MME/prescription, 95% CI - 148.15 to - 17.84 and - 10.41 tabs/prescription, 95% CI - 19.70 to - 1.13). There were no significant differences in rates of refills or encounters at 30 days based on exposure to the interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a prescribing limit and EMR alert was associated with an approximately 22% greater decrease in opioid dose per new prescription in NJ compared with controls in PA. The combination of prescribing limits and alerts may be an effective strategy to influence prescriber behavior.

Providing Incentive for Emergency Physician X-Waiver Training: An Evaluation of Program Success and Postintervention Buprenorphine Prescribing.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Emergency department (ED) initiation of buprenorphine for patients with opioid use disorder increases treatment engagement but remains an uncommon practice. One important barrier to ED-initiated buprenorphine is the additional training requirement (X waiver). Our objective is to evaluate the influence of a financial incentive program on emergency physician completion of X-waiver training. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the program's effect on buprenorphine prescribing and to explore physician attitudes toward the incentive. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational cohort study set in 3 urban academic EDs before and after implementation of a financial incentive program providing $750 for completion of X-waiver training. We describe program participation as well as rates of buprenorphine prescribing per opioid use disorder-related encounter before and after the intervention period, using electronic health record data. We also completed a postintervention physician survey assessing attitudes about the incentive program. RESULTS: Overall, 89% of eligible emergency physicians (56/63) completed the X-waiver training during the 6-week incentive period. In the 5 months after the incentive, buprenorphine prescribing per opioid use disorder-related encounter increased from 0.5% to 16% (Δ 15%; 95% confidence interval 10.6% to 19.9%), with substantial variability across sites (range 8% to 22% of opioid use disorder-related encounters). In a postintervention survey, 67% of participating physicians indicated that they would have completed the training for a lower amount. CONCLUSION: A financial incentive paying approximately half the clinical rate was effective in promoting emergency physician X-waiver training. The effect on ED-based buprenorphine prescribing was positive but variable across sites, and likely dependent on the availability of additional supports.

Local health departments and the implementation of evidence-based policies to address opioid overdose mortality.

BACKGROUND: In the context of the opioid overdose crisis, local health departments are on the front lines, coordinating programs and services and translating state and federal policies into community action. While media reports describe growth of Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) programs among local health departments, little is known about program features, scope, and target populations. Methods: We surveyed health departments in 180 United States counties with high overdose mortality rates. Results: Among health officials from 54 counties (30% response), many counties reported implementation of evidence-based practices, with a high degree of programmatic variation. The majority of responding health departments (94%) conducted overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs. Programs were heterogeneous in scale, with a reported median of 250 naloxone kits (range 1-25,000 kits) acquired for community distribution. In addition, four in five respondents were aware of their state's standing order policy for increasing naloxone access. While the majority of respondents reported county-level availability of at least one form of evidence-based medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD), many reported no availability of buprenorphine (33%) or methadone (43%). Conclusions: Local health departments are vital to reducing opioid overdose mortality, and many are implementing relevant evidence-based practices. To support further adoption of potentially life-saving strategies, health departments need adequate funding and staffing as well as policies and guidelines to support implementation.

Trends in Before Medically Advised Discharges for Patients With Opioid Use Disorder, 2016-2020.

This study examines discharge trends for opioid-related admissions from 2016-2020 with a focus on admissions with opioid use disorder and an injection-related infection.

Psychiatric Consultation at Your Fingertips: Descriptive Analysis of Electronic Consultation From Primary Care to Psychiatry.

BACKGROUND: Mental health problems are commonly encountered in primary care, with primary care providers (PCPs) experiencing challenges referring patients to specialty mental health care. Electronic consultation (eConsult) is one model that has been shown to improve timely access to subspecialty care in a number of medical subspecialties. eConsults generally involve a PCP-initiated referral for specialty consultation for a clinical question that is outside their expertise but may not require an in-person evaluation. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to describe the implementation of eConsults for psychiatry in a large academic health system. METHODS: We performed a content analysis of the first 50 eConsults to psychiatry after program implementation. For each question and response, we coded consults as pertaining to diagnosis and/or management as well as categories of medication choice, drug side effects or interactions, and queries about referrals and navigating the health care system. We also performed a chart review to evaluate the timeliness of psychiatrist responses and PCP implementation of recommendations. RESULTS: Depression was the most common consult template selected by PCPs (20/50, 40%), followed by the generic template (12/50, 24%) and anxiety (8/50, 16%). Most questions (49/50, 98%) pertained primarily to management, particularly for medications. Psychiatrists commented on both diagnosis (28/50, 56%) and management (50/50, 100%), responded in an average of 1.4 days, and recommended in-person consultation for 26% (13/50) of patients. PCPs implemented psychiatrist recommendations 76% (38/50) of the time. CONCLUSIONS: For the majority of patients, psychiatrists provided strategies for ongoing management in primary care without an in-person evaluation, and PCPs implemented most psychiatrist recommendations. eConsults show promise as one means of supporting PCPs to deliver mental health care to patients with common psychiatric disorders.

Yield of screening for TB and HIV among children failing to thrive in Botswana.

BACKGROUND: Failure to thrive (FTT) is a sign of tuberculosis (TB) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. We assessed TB and HIV prevalence in children with FTT at one clinic in Botswana. METHODS: In July 2010, we screened all children attending a 'Well Child' clinic for FTT. Children with FTT were referred to a paediatrician who: (i) assessed causes of FTT, (ii) evaluated for HIV and TB and (iii) reviewed the patient chart for evaluations for TB and HIV. RESULTS: Of 919 children screened, 176 (19%) had FTT. One hundred eighteen (67%) children saw a paediatrician, and of these, 95 (81%) completed the TB evaluation. TB was newly diagnosed in 6 of 95 (6%). At review, HIV status was known in 23 of 118 (19%). Ninety-five had an unknown HIV status. Forty-five (47%) tested for HIV; all tested HIV-negative. CONCLUSION: TB and HIV screening among children with FTT diagnosed TB in 6% of cases completing an evaluation, but no new HIV infections.

Mapping Buprenorphine Access at Philadelphia Pharmacies.

OBJECTIVES: Buprenorphine is not reliably stocked in many pharmacies, and pharmacy-level barriers may deter patients from opioid use disorder care. We surveyed all outpatient pharmacies in Philadelphia to describe variation in buprenorphine access and developed a map application to aid in identifying pharmacies that stock the medication. METHODS: Using a dataset from the Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs, we conducted a telephone survey of operating outpatient pharmacies (N = 422) about their buprenorphine stocking and dispensing practices. We used ArcGIS Pro 3.0.3 to join US Census Bureau ZIP code-level race and ethnicity data, conduct descriptive analyses, and create a map application. RESULTS: We collected data from 351 pharmacies (83% response rate). Two hundred thirty-eight pharmacies (68%) indicated that they regularly stock buprenorphine; 6 (2%) would order it when a prescription is sent. Ninety-one (26%) said that they do not stock or order buprenorphine, and 16 (5%) were unsure. We identified 137 "easier access" pharmacies (39%), meaning they regularly stock buprenorphine, dispense to new patients, and have no dosage maximums. Zip codes with predominantly White residents had a median (interquartile range) of 3 (2-4) "easier access" pharmacies, and those with predominantly Black residents a median (interquartile range) of 2 (1-4.5). Nine zip codes had no "easier access" pharmacies, and 3 had only one; these 3 zip codes are areas with predominantly Black residents. CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine access is not equitable across Philadelphia and a quarter of pharmacies choose not to carry the medication. Our map application may be used to identify pharmacies in Philadelphia that stock buprenorphine.