Piloting a statewide emergency department take-home naloxone program: Improving the quality of care for patients at risk of opioid overdose.

BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) patients with nonfatal opioid overdose are at high risk for subsequent fatal overdose, yet ED programs aimed at reducing harm from opioid use remain underdeveloped. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to pilot a statewide ED take-home naloxone program and improve the care of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) and risky drug use through training and interprofessional network building. METHODS: Nine hospital EDs with pharmacy, nurse, and physician champions were recruited, surveyed, and trained. Take-home naloxone rescue kits were developed, disseminated, and tracked. Two overdose prevention summits were convened prior to the COVID pandemic, and two X-waiver training courses aimed at emergency physicians and advanced practice providers were arranged, both in person and virtual. RESULTS: A total of 872 naloxone rescue kits were distributed to ED patients at risk of opioid overdose during the first phase of this project, and more than 140 providers were trained in the use of medications for OUD in acute care settings. CONCLUSIONS: A statewide ED take-home naloxone program was shown to be feasible across a range of different hospitals with varying maturity in preexisting OUD resources and capabilities. Future work will be aimed at both expanding and measuring the effectiveness of this work.

Statewide Prehabilitation Program and Episode Payment in Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Prehabilitation has been shown to improve postoperative outcomes in a variety of patient populations undergoing major operations. The feasibility, generalizability, and value of broad implementation of prehabilitation outside the research environment are unknown. METHODS: Medicare claims data from 2014 to 2017 were used to conduct a multicenter (21 Michigan hospitals) pragmatic cohort study. Patients and controls were followed for the duration of their index surgical hospitalization and for 90 days postoperatively. Medicare beneficiaries older than 18 years who underwent inpatient surgical procedures at a participating hospital during the study time period were eligible for inclusion. The prehabilitation program involved a home-based walking program with supplementary education on nutrition, smoking cessation, and psychological preparation for surgical procedure. Data were analyzed with an intention-to-treat approach using t-tests and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Propensity score matching used comorbidities and demographic factors to match controls to patients in a 2:1 manner with an exact match required for operation type. RESULTS: Patients (n = 523) and controls (n = 1,046) had no significant differences in demographic factors or comorbidities. Patients had significantly shorter median hospital length of stay (6 vs 7 days; p < 0.01) than controls and were more likely to be discharged to home (65.6% vs 57.0%, p < 0.01). Total episode payments were significantly lower for patients compared with controls ($31,641 vs $34,837; p = 0.04). Patients had significantly lower post-acute care payments for skilled nursing facility ($941 vs $1,566; p = 0.02) and home health ($829 vs $960; p = 0.03) services. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in a prehabilitation program in Michigan was associated with shorter length of stay and lower total episode payments after operation. Payers and hospitals should invest in the implementation of simple home-based prehabilitation programs.