Community pharmacists' attitudes toward and practice of pharmacy-based harm reduction services in Pittsburgh, PA: a descriptive survey.

BACKGROUND: In Pittsburgh, PA, legal changes in recent decades have set the stage for an expanded role for community pharmacists to provide harm reduction services, including distributing naloxone and non-prescription syringes (NPS). In the wake of the syndemics of the COVID-19 pandemic and worsening overdose deaths from synthetic opioids, we examine knowledge, attitudes, and practices of harm reduction services among community pharmacists in Pittsburgh and identify potential barriers of expanded pharmacy-based harm reduction services. METHODS: We provided flyers to 83 community pharmacies within a 5-mile radius of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center to recruit practicing community pharmacists to participate in an anonymous electronic survey. We used a 53-question Qualtrics survey consisting of multiple-choice, 5 or 6 point-Likert scale, and open-ended questions adapted from 5 existing survey instruments. Survey measures included demographics, knowledge, attitudes, and practices of harm reduction services (specifically naloxone and NPS provision), and explored self-reported barriers to future implementation. Data was collected July-August 2022. We conducted descriptive analysis using frequencies and proportions reported for categorical variables as well as means and standard deviations (SD) for continuous variables. We analyzed open-ended responses using inductive content analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-eight community pharmacists responded to the survey. 90% of participants agreed pharmacists had a role in overdose prevention efforts, and 92% of participants had previously distributed naloxone. Although no pharmacists reported ever refusing to distribute naloxone, only 29% always provided overdose prevention counseling with each naloxone distributed. In contrast, while 87% of participants had positive attitudes toward the usefulness of NPS for reducing disease, only 73% of participants ever distributed NPS, and 54% had refused NPS to a customer. Participants endorsed a lack of time and concerns over clientele who used drugs as the most significant barriers to offering more comprehensive harm reduction services. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight that while most community pharmacists have embraced naloxone provision, pharmacy policies and individual pharmacists continue to limit accessibility of NPS. Future expansion efforts for pharmacy-based harm reduction services should not only address the time and labor constraints identified by community pharmacists, but also fear-based policy and stigma toward people who inject drugs and harm reduction more broadly.

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.

"Helping the Helpers"-Making Access to Buprenorphine the New Standard of Care for Physicians in State Monitoring Programs.

This commentary argues that the Federation of State Medical Board's (FSMB) recommendations concerning the use of buprenorphine for physicians in their state-affiliated monitoring programs falls short of effectively permitting an evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder. Although the FSMB acknowledges the benefits of medications for opioid use disorder and recommends that physicians who elect to start on buprenorphine receive treatment safely and privately, the FSMB is opposed to health care professionals practicing while on buprenorphine. Their rationale is based on the notion that physicians are exceptional in their ability to remain in recovery without medications for opioid use disorder and the unsupported assumption that buprenorphine causes significant cognitive impairment. This commentary contends that FSMB policy recommendations should work to destigmatize and indeed support evidence-based treatments for physicians with substance use disorders.

Inpatient Addiction Medicine Consultation Service Impact on Post-discharge Patient Mortality: a Propensity-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inpatient addiction medicine consultation services (AMCS) have grown rapidly, but there is limited research of their impact on patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether AMCS is associated with all-cause mortality and hospital utilization post-discharge. DESIGN: This was a propensity-score-matchedcase-control study from 2018 to 2020. PARTICIPANTS: The intervention group included patients referred to the AMCS from October 2018 to March 2020. Matched control participants included patients hospitalized from October 2017 to September 2018 at an urban academic hospital with a large suburban and rural catchment area. MAIN MEASURES: The effect of treatment was estimated as the difference between the proportion of subjects experiencing the event (7-day and 30-day readmission, emergency department visits, and mortality within 90 days) for each group in the matched sample. KEY RESULTS: There were 711 patients in the intervention group and 2172 patients in the control group. The most common substance use disorders among the intervention group were primary alcohol use disorder (n=181; 25.5%) and primary opioid use disorder (n=175, 24.6%) with over a third with polysubstance use (n=257, 36.1%). Intervention patients showed a reduction in 90-day mortality post-hospital discharge (average treatment effect [ATE]: -2.35%, 95% CI: -3.57, -1.13; p-value <0.001) compared to propensity-matched controls. We found a statistically significant reduction in 7-day hospital readmission by 2.15% (95% CI: -3.65, -0.65; p=0.005) and a nonsignificant reduction in 30-day readmission (ATE: -2.38%, 95% CI: -5.20, 0.45; p=0.099). There was a statistically significant increase in 30-day emergency department visits (ATE: 5.32%, 95% CI: 2.19, 8.46; 0.001) compared to matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: There was a reduction in 90-day all-cause mortality for the AMCS intervention group compared to matched controls, although the impact on hospital utilization was mixed. AMCS are systems interventions that are effective tools to improve patient health and reduce all-cause mortality.