ABSTRACT
Severe opioid withdrawal, risk of patient-initiated discharge, and some inpatients' use of unregulated substances prompt clinical and ethical questions considered in this commentary on a case. Short-acting opioids can be used to manage inpatients' pain and opioid use disorder (OUD) withdrawal symptoms. Including evidence-based interventions-such as naloxone kits, substance use equipment, and supervised consumption-in some inpatients' care plans may make those patients safer and reduce their risk of death. These and other strategies align with clinicians' ethical duties to minimize harms and maximize benefits for inpatients with OUD.
Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Inpatients , Opioid-Related Disorders , Substance Withdrawal Syndrome , Humans , Analgesics, Opioid/adverse effects , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Opioid-Related Disorders/prevention & control , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Substance Withdrawal Syndrome/drug therapy , Risk Assessment , Naloxone/therapeutic use , Naloxone/administration & dosage , Pain/drug therapy , Male , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Narcotic Antagonists/administration & dosageABSTRACT
Importance: The rise of fentanyl and other high-potency synthetic opioids across US and Canada has been associated with increasing hospitalizations and unprecedented overdose deaths. Hospitalization is a critical touchpoint to engage patients and offer life-saving opioid use disorder (OUD) care when admitted for OUD or other medical conditions. Observations: Clinical best practices include managing acute withdrawal and pain, initiating medication for OUD, integrating harm reduction principles and practices, addressing in-hospital substance use, and supporting hospital-to-community care transitions. Fentanyl complicates hospital OUD care. Fentanyl's high potency intensifies pain, withdrawal, and cravings and increases the risk for overdose and other harms. Fentanyl's unique pharmacology has rendered traditional techniques for managing opioid withdrawal and initiating buprenorphine and methadone inadequate for some patients, necessitating novel strategies. Further, co-use of opioids with stimulants drugs is common, and the opioid supply is unpredictable and can be contaminated with benzodiazepines, xylazine, and other substances. To address these challenges, clinicians are increasingly relying on emerging practices, such as low-dose buprenorphine initiation with opioid continuation, rapid methadone titration, and the use of alternative opioid agonists. Hospitals must also reconsider conventional approaches to in-hospital substance use and expand clinicians' understanding and embrace of harm reduction, which is a philosophy and set of practical strategies that supports people who use drugs to be safer and healthier without judgment, coercion, or discrimination. Hospital-to-community care transitions should ensure uninterrupted access to OUD care after discharge, which requires special consideration and coordination. Finally, improving hospital-based addiction care requires dedicated infrastructure and expertise. Preparing hospitals across the US and Canada to deliver OUD best practices requires investments in clinical champions, staff education, leadership commitment, community partnerships, quality metrics, and financing. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this review indicate that fentanyl creates increased urgency and new challenges for hospital OUD care. Hospital clinicians and systems have a central role in addressing the current drug crisis.
Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Fentanyl , Hospitalization , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Opioid-Related Disorders/prevention & control , Fentanyl/therapeutic use , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Opiate Substitution Treatment/methods , Buprenorphine/therapeutic use , Harm Reduction , Adult , Substance Withdrawal Syndrome/drug therapy , Methadone/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs in North America often continue to inject while hospitalized, and are at increased risk of premature hospital discharge, unplanned readmission, and death. In-hospital access to sterile injection supplies may reduce some harms associated with ongoing injection drug use. However, access to needle and syringe programs in acute care settings is limited. We explored the implementation of a needle and syringe program integrated into a large urban tertiary hospital in Western Canada. The needle and syringe program was administered by an addiction medicine consult team that offers patients access to specialized clinical care and connection to community services. METHODS: We utilized a focused ethnographic design and semi-structured interviews to elicit experiences and potential improvements from 25 hospitalized people who inject drugs who were offered supplies from the needle and syringe program. RESULTS: Participants were motivated to accept supplies to prevent injection-related harms and access to supplies was facilitated by trust in consult team staff. However, fears of negative repercussions from non-consult team staff, including premature discharge or undesired changes to medication regimes, caused some participants to hesitate or refuse to accept supplies. Participants described modifications to hospital policies regarding inpatient drug use or access to an inpatient supervised consumption service as potential ways to mitigate patients' fears. CONCLUSIONS: Acute care needle and syringe programs may aid hospital providers in reducing harms and improving hospital outcomes for people who inject drugs. However, modifications to hospital policies and settings may be necessary.
Subject(s)
Substance Abuse, Intravenous , Humans , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/complications , Needle-Exchange Programs , Needles , Inpatients , PolicyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are high-risk for short-term mortality and morbidity. Emergency department (ED) interventions can reduce those risks, but benefits wane without ongoing community follow-up. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an ED-based intensive community outreach program. METHODS: At two urban EDs between October 2019 and March 2020, we enrolled patients with OUD not currently on opioid agonist therapy (OAT) in a prospective cohort study evaluating a one-year intensive community outreach program, which provided ongoing addictions care, housing resources, and community support. We surveyed patients at intake and at scheduled outreach encounters at one, two, six, and twelve months. Follow-up surveys assessed OAT uptake, addictions care engagement, housing status, quality of life scores, illicit opioid use, and outreach helpfulness. We used descriptive statistics for each period and conducted sensitivity and subgroup analyses to account for missing data. RESULTS: Of 84 baseline participants, 29% were female and 32% were housed, with a median age of 33. Sixty participants (71%) completed at least one follow-up survey. Survey completion rates were 37%, 38%, 39%, and 40% respectively at one, two, six, and twelve months. Participants had a median of three outreach encounters. Among respondents, OAT was 0% at enrolment and ranged from 38% to 56% at follow-up; addictions care engagement was 22% at enrolment and ranged from 65% to 81% during follow-up; and housing was 40% at enrolment and ranged from 48% to 59% during follow-up. Improvements from baseline to follow-up occurred for all time periods. OAT and engagement in care benefits were maintained in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Respondents rated the outreach program as helpful at all time periods, CONCLUSION: An ED-initiated intensive outreach program for patients with OUD not yet on OAT was associated with a persistent increase in OAT use and engagement in care, as well as housing.
Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , Female , Male , Cohort Studies , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Opiate Substitution Treatment , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Emergency Service, HospitalABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To identify individual and site-related factors associated with frequent emergency department (ED) buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP) initiation. BUP initiation, an effective opioid use disorder (OUD) intervention, varies widely across Canadian EDs. METHODS: We surveyed emergency physicians in 6 Canadian provinces from 2018 to 2019 using bilingual paper and web-based questionnaires. Survey domains included BUP-related practice, demographics, attitudes toward BUP, and site characteristics. We defined frequent BUP initiation (the primary outcome) as at least once per month, high OUD prevalence as at least one OUD patient per shift, and high OUD resources as at least 3 out of the following 5 resources: BUP initiation pathways, BUP in ED, peer navigators, accessible addiction specialists, and accessible follow-up clinics. We excluded responses from sites with <50% participation (to minimize non-responder bias) and those missing the primary outcome. We used univariate analysis to identify associations between frequent BUP initiation and factors of interest, stratifying by OUD prevalence. RESULTS: We excluded 3 responses for missing BUP initiation frequency and 9 for low response rate at one ED. Of the remaining 649 respondents from 34 EDs, 374 (58%) practiced in metropolitan areas, 384 (59%) reported high OUD prevalence, 312 (48%) had high OUD resources, and 161 (25%) initiated BUP frequently. Age, gender, board certification and years in practice were not associated with frequent BUP initiation. Site-specific factors were associated with frequent BUP initiation (high OUD resources [OR 6.91], high OUD prevalence [OR 4.45], and metropolitan location [OR 2.39],) as were individual attitudinal factors (willingness, confidence, and responsibility to initiate BUP.) Similar associations persisted in the high OUD prevalence subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Individual attitudinal and site-specific factors were associated with frequent BUP initiation. Training to increase physician confidence and increasing OUD resources could increase BUP initiation and benefit ED patients with OUD.
Subject(s)
Buprenorphine , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , Buprenorphine/therapeutic use , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Canada/epidemiology , Buprenorphine, Naloxone Drug Combination/therapeutic use , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Opioid-Related Disorders/complications , Emergency Service, Hospital , Cognition , Naloxone/therapeutic useABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Many emergency department (ED) patients with opioid use disorder are candidates for home buprenorphine/naloxone initiation with to-go packs. We studied patient opinions and acceptance of buprenorphine/naloxone to-go packs, and factors associated with their acceptance. METHODS: We identified patients at two urban EDs in British Columbia who met opioid use disorder criteria, were not presently on opioid agonist therapy and not in active withdrawal. We offered patients buprenorphine/naloxone to-go as standard of care and then administered a survey to record buprenorphine/naloxone to-go acceptance, the primary outcome. Survey domains included current substance use, prior experience with opioid agonist therapy, and buprenorphine/naloxone related opinions. Patient factors were examined for association with buprenorphine/naloxone to-go acceptance. RESULTS: Of the 89 patients enrolled, median age was 33 years, 27% were female, 67.4% had previously taken buprenorphine/naloxone, and 19.1% had never taken opioid agonist therapy. Overall, 78.7% believed that EDs should dispense buprenorphine/naloxone to-go packs. Thirty-eight (42.7%) patients accepted buprenorphine/naloxone to-go. Buprenorphine/naloxone to-go acceptance was associated with lack of prior opioid agonist therapy, less than 10 years of opioid use and no injection drug use. Reasons to accept included initiating treatment while in withdrawal; reasons to reject included prior unsatisfactory buprenorphine/naloxone experience and interest in other treatments. CONCLUSION: Although less than half of our study population accepted buprenorphine/naloxone to-go when offered, most thought this intervention was beneficial. In isolation, ED buprenorphine/naloxone to-go will not meet the needs of all patients with opioid use disorder. Clinicians and policy makers should consider buprenorphine/naloxone to-go as a low-barrier option for opioid use disorder treatment from the ED when integrated with robust addiction care services.
RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: De nombreux patients des services d'urgence (SU) atteints d'un trouble lié à la consommation d'opioïdes sont des candidats à l'initiation à la buprénorphine/naloxone à domicile avec des trousses à emporter. Nous avons étudié les opinions des patients et l'acceptation des paquets de buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter, ainsi que les facteurs associés à leur acceptation. MéTHODES: Nous avons identifié des patients à deux urgences urbaines de la Colombie-Britannique qui répondaient aux critères relatifs aux troubles liés à l'utilisation d'opioïdes, qui ne suivaient pas actuellement un traitement aux agonistes des opioïdes et qui n'étaient pas en sevrage actif. Nous avons offert aux patients la buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter comme norme de soins, puis nous avons administré une enquête pour enregistrer l'acceptation de la buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter, le critère de jugement principal. Les domaines d'enquête comprenaient la consommation actuelle de substances, l'expérience antérieure avec le traitement aux agonistes opioïdes et les opinions liées à la buprénorphine/naloxone. Les facteurs du patient ont été examinés pour déterminer l'association avec l'acceptation de la buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter. RéSULTATS: Sur 89 patients inscrits, l'âge médian était de 33 ans, 27,0% étaient des femmes, 67,4% avaient déjà pris de la buprénorphine/naloxone et 19,1% n'avaient jamais pris de traitement aux agonistes opioïdes. Dans l'ensemble, 78,7% des répondants étaient d'avis que les SU devraient distribuer des paquets de buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter. Trente-huit (42,7%) patients ont accepté la buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter. L'acceptation de la buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter était associée à l'absence de traitement antérieur par agonistes opioïdes, à moins de 10 ans d'utilisation d'opioïdes et à l'absence de consommation de drogues injectables. Les raisons d'accepter comprenaient le fait de commencer un traitement pendant le sevrage; les raisons de rejeter comprenaient une expérience antérieure insatisfaisante de buprénorphine/naloxone et un intérêt pour d'autres traitements. CONCLUSION: Bien que moins de la moitié de notre population à l'étude ait accepté la buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter lorsqu'elle lui était offerte, la plupart ont pensé que cette intervention était bénéfique. Isolément, la buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter à l'urgence ne répondra pas aux besoins de tous les patients atteints de troubles liés à l'utilisation d'opioïdes. Les cliniciens et les décideurs devraient considérer la buprénorphine/naloxone à emporter comme une option à faible barrière pour le traitement des troubles liés à la consommation d'opioïdes par l'urgence lorsqu'elle est intégrée à de solides services de soins de la toxicomanie.
Subject(s)
Narcotic Antagonists , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , Female , Adult , Male , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Buprenorphine, Naloxone Drug Combination/therapeutic use , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Emergency Service, HospitalABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Opioid use disorder is a major public health concern that accounts for a high number of potential years of life lost. Buprenorphine/naloxone is a recommended treatment for opioid use disorder that can be started in the emergency department (ED). We developed an ED-based program to initiate buprenorphine/naloxone for eligible patients who live with opioid use disorder, and to provide unscheduled, next-day follow-up referrals to an opioid use disorder treatment clinic (in person or virtual) for continuing patient care throughout Alberta. METHODS: In this quality improvement initiative, we supported local ED teams to offer buprenorphine/naloxone to eligible patients presenting to the ED with suspected opioid use disorder and refer these patients for follow-up care. Process, outcome, and balancing measures were evaluated over the first 2 years of the initiative (May 15, 2018-May 15, 2020). RESULTS: The program was implemented at 107 sites across Alberta during our evaluation period. Buprenorphine/naloxone initiations in the ED increased post-intervention at most sites with baseline data available (11 of 13), and most patients (67%) continued to fill an opioid agonist prescription at 180 days post-ED visit. Of the 572 referrals recorded at clinics, 271 (47%) attended their first follow-up visit. Safety events were reported in ten initiations and were all categorized as no harm to minimal harm. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized provincial approach to initiating buprenorphine/naloxone in the ED for patients living with opioid use disorder was spread to 107 sites with dedicated program support staff and adjustment to local contexts. Similar quality improvement approaches may benefit other jurisdictions.
ABSTRAIT: OBJECTIFS: Le trouble lié à la consommation d'opioïdes est une préoccupation majeure en santé publique qui explique le nombre élevé d'années potentielles de vie perdues. La buprénorphine/naloxone est un traitement recommandé pour le trouble lié à l'utilisation d'opioïdes qui peut être commencé au service des urgences (SU). Nous avons mis au point un programme axé sur les urgences pour commencer la buprénorphine/naloxone pour les patients éligibles qui vivent avec un trouble lié à l'utilisation d'opioïdes, et pour fournir suivis des cas référés le jour suivant vers une clinique de soins des troubles liés à l'utilisation d'opioïdes (sur place ou virtuelle) pour les soins continus aux patients partout en Alberta. MéTHODES: Dans le cadre de cette initiative d'amélioration de la qualité, nous avons aidé les équipes locales de SU à offrir la buprénorphine/naloxone aux patients admissibles qui se présentent à la SU avec un trouble présumé de consommation d'opioïdes et à les diriger vers des soins de suivi. Le processus, les résultats et les mesures d'équilibre ont été évalués au cours des deux premières années de l'initiative (du 15 mai 2018 au 15 mai 2020). RéSULTATS: Le programme a été mis en Åuvre dans 107 sites en Alberta pendant notre période d'évaluation. Les initiations à la buprénorphine/naloxone à l'urgence ont augmenté après l'intervention dans la plus grande partie de sites pour lesquels des données de référence étaient disponibles (11 sur 13), et la plupart des patients (67 %) ont continué de remplir une ordonnance d'agonistes opioïdes 180 jours après la visite à l'urgence. Sur les 572 renvois enregistrés aux cliniques, 271 (47 %) ont assisté à leur première visite de suivi. Des événements liés à la sécurité ont été signalés dans 10 initiatives et ont tous été classés comme n'ayant causé aucun conséquences à des conséquences minimes. CONCLUSIONS: Une approche provinciale standardisé de lancement de la buprénorphine/naloxone à l'urgence pour les patients atteints d'un trouble lié à la consommation d'opioïdes a été diffusée à 107 sites à l'aide de soutien aux programmes spécialisé et des ajustements aux contextes locaux. Des approches semblables d'amélioration de la qualité pourraient profiter à d'autres juridictions.
Subject(s)
Buprenorphine , Opioid-Related Disorders , Humans , Narcotic Antagonists/therapeutic use , Buprenorphine/therapeutic use , Alberta/epidemiology , Quality Improvement , Buprenorphine, Naloxone Drug Combination/therapeutic use , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital , Referral and Consultation , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic useABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Single-visit testing and treatment for syphilis can reduce follow-up visits. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the performance and treatment outcomes of two dual syphilis/HIV point-of-care tests (POCTs). METHODS: Participants aged 16 years and older were offered concurrent syphilis/HIV POCTs with fingerstick blood sampling using two extremely rapid (<5 minutes) devices (MedMira Multiplo Rapid TP/HIV test and INSTI Multiplex HIV-1/HIV-2/Syphilis Antibody Test). Those with positive POCT results were offered same-day syphilis treatment and linkage to HIV care. Nurses performed testing at two emergency departments, a First Nations community, a correctional facility, and a sexually transmitted infection clinic. POCT results were compared with those of standard serological testing. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated. RESULTS: Between August 2020 and February 2022, 1526 visits were completed. Both POCTs accurately identified participants with HIV (sensitivity, 100% [24 of 24]; 95% CI, 86.2-100%; specificity, 99.6% [1319 of 1324]; 95% CI, 99.1-99.8%), linking 24 HIV cases to care. Both tests were most sensitive with a rapid plasma reagin (RPR) of ≥1:8 dilutions (Multiplo: sensitivity, 98.3% [231 of 235]; 95% CI, 95.7-99.3%; specificity, 99.5% [871 of 875]; 95% CI, 98.8-99.8%; INSTI Multiplex: sensitivity, 97.9% [230 of 235]; 95% CI, 95.1-99.1%; specificity, 99.8% [873 of 875]; 95% CI, 99.2-99.9%) and least sensitive with non-reactive RPR (Multiplo: sensitivity, 54.1% [59 of 109]; 95% CI, 44.8-63.2%; specificity, 99.5% [871 of 875]; 95% CI, 98.8-99.8%; INSTI Multiplex: sensitivity, 28.4% [31 of 109]; 95% CI, 20.8-37.5%; specificity, 99.8% [873 of 875]; 95% CI, 99.2-99.9%). Eighty-five percent of participants with infectious syphilis were treated on the same day as the positive POCT result. DISCUSSION: Two extremely rapid (<5 minutes) dual syphilis/HIV POCTs showed excellent sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of active syphilis (RPR, ≥1:8 dilutions) and HIV and confirmed the ability to offer single-visit testing and treatment for syphilis and linkage to HIV care in diverse clinical settings.
Subject(s)
HIV Infections , Syphilis , Humans , Syphilis/diagnosis , Syphilis/drug therapy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Treponema pallidum , Syphilis Serodiagnosis/methods , HIV Infections/complications , HIV Infections/diagnosis , Point-of-Care Testing , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We described the experiences and preferences of people with opioid use disorder who access emergency department (ED) services regarding ED care and ED-based interventions. METHODS: Between June and September 2020, we conducted phone or in-person semistructured qualitative interviews with patients recently discharged from 2 urban EDs in Vancouver, BC, Canada, to explore experiences and preferences of ED care and ED-based opioid use disorder interventions. We recruited participants from a cohort of adults with opioid use disorder who were participating in an ED-initiated outreach program. We transcribed audio recordings verbatim. We iteratively developed a thematic coding structure, with interim analyses to assess for thematic saturation. Two team members with lived experience of opioid use provided feedback on content, wording, and analysis throughout the study. RESULTS: We interviewed 19 participants. Participants felt discriminated against for their drug use, which led to poorer perceived health care and downstream ED avoidance. Participants desired to be treated like ED patients who do not use drugs and to be more involved in their ED care. Participants nevertheless felt comfortable discussing their substance use with ED staff and valued continuous ED operating hours. Regarding opioid use disorder treatment, participants supported ED-based buprenorphine/naloxone programs but also suggested additional options (eg, different initiation regimens and settings and other opioid agonist therapies) to facilitate further treatment uptake. CONCLUSION: Based on participant experiences, we recommend addressing potentially stigmatizing practices, increasing patient involvement in their care during ED visits, and increasing access to various opioid use disorder-related treatments and community support.
Subject(s)
Buprenorphine , Emergency Medical Services , Opioid-Related Disorders , Adult , Humans , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Emergency Service, Hospital , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Emergency Treatment , Buprenorphine/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Objective: To quantify unused opioids among adult and pediatric patients discharged from the emergency department (ED) or ambulatory care settings with a prescription for acute pain. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINHAL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and the gray literature from inception to April 29, 2021. We included observational studies in which any patient with an acutely painful condition received a prescription for an opioid on discharge from an outpatient care setting, and unused opioids were quantified. Two reviewers screened records for eligibility, extracted data, and conducted the quality assessment. Where possible, we pooled data and otherwise described the results of studies narratively. Total unused prescriptions were synthesized using a weighted average. Random effects models were used, and heterogeneity was measured by the I2 statistic. Our primary outcome was the quantity of unused opioid medication available after receiving a prescription for acute pain. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients with unused opioids following a prescription, the proportion of patients using no opioids, morphine equivalents of unused opioids, and factors associated with leftover opioids. Results: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of 9 studies in emergency and ambulatory care settings, 59.6% of prescribed opioids remained unused; pediatric patients had 69.3% of their prescriptions remaining, compared to 54.6% among adult patients. The highest proportion of unused opioids was found following dental extractions (82.6%). Conclusions and Relevance: More than 50% of opioids remain unused following prescriptions for acute pain. Responsible prescribing must be accompanied by education on safer use, storage, and disposal.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: People who use drugs and are structurally vulnerable (e.g., experiencing unstable and/or lack of housing) frequently access acute care. However, acute care systems and providers may not be able to effectively address social needs during hospitalization. Our objectives were to: 1) explore social service providers' perspectives on addressing social needs for this patient population; and 2) identify what possible strategies social service providers suggest for improving patient care. METHODS: We completed 18 semi-structured interviews with social service providers (e.g., social workers, transition coordinators, peer support workers) at a large, urban acute care hospital in Western Canada between August 8, 2018 and January 24, 2019. Interviews explored staff experiences providing social services to structurally vulnerable patients who use drugs, as well as continuity between hospital and community social services. We conducted latent content analysis and organized our findings in relation to the socioecological model. RESULTS: Tensions emerged on how participants viewed patient-level barriers to addressing social needs. Some providers blamed poor outcomes on perceived patient deficits, while others emphasized structural factors that impede patients' ability to secure social services. Within the hospital, some participants felt that acute care was not an appropriate location to address social needs, but most felt that hospitalization affords a unique opportunity to build relationships with structurally vulnerable patients. Participants described how a lack of housing and financial supports for people who use drugs in the community limited successful social service provision in acute care. They identified potential policy solutions, such as establishing housing supports that concurrently address medical, income, and substance use needs. CONCLUSIONS: Broad policy changes are required to improve care for structurally vulnerable patients who use drugs, including: 1) ending acute care's ambivalence towards social services; 2) addressing multi-level gaps in housing and financial support; 3) implementing hospital-based Housing First teams; and, 4) offering sub-acute care with integrated substance use management.
Subject(s)
Social Work , Substance-Related Disorders , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Qualitative Research , Substance-Related Disorders/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Substance use is common among people who visit emergency departments (EDs) frequently. We aimed to characterize subgroups within this cohort to better understand care needs/gaps, and generalizability of characteristics in three Canadian provinces. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study (April 1st, 2013 to March 31st, 2016) of ED patients in Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia (B.C.) We included patients ≥ 18 years with substance use-related healthcare contact during the study period and frequent ED visits, defined as those in the top 10% of ED utilization when all patients were ordered by annual ED visit number. We used linked administrative databases including ED visits and hospitalizations (all provinces); mental heath-related hospitalizations (Ontario and Alberta); and prescriptions, physician services, and mortality (B.C.). We compared to cohorts of people with (1) frequent ED visits and no substance use, and (2) non-frequent ED visits and substance use. We employed cluster analysis to identify subgroups with distinct visit patterns and clinical characteristics during index year, April 1st, 2014 to March 31st, 2015. RESULTS: In 2014/15, we identified 19,604, 7,706, and 9,404 people with frequent ED visits and substance use in Ontario, Alberta, and B.C (median 37-43 years; 60.9-63.0% male), whose ED visits and hospitalizations were higher than comparison groups. In all provinces, cluster analyses identified subgroups with "extreme" and "moderate" frequent visits (median 13-19 versus 4-6 visits/year). "Extreme" versus "moderate" subgroups had more hospitalizations, mental health-related ED visits, general practitioner visits but less continuity with one provider, more commonly left against medical advice, and had higher 365-day mortality in B.C. (9.3% versus 6.6%; versus 10.4% among people with frequent ED visits and no substance use, and 4.3% among people with non-frequent ED visits and substance use). The most common ED diagnosis was acute alcohol intoxication in all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Subgroups of people with "extreme" (13-19 visits/year) and "moderate" (4-6 visits/year) frequent ED visits and substance use had similar utilization patterns and characteristics in Ontario, Alberta, and B.C., and the "extreme" subgroup had high mortality. Our findings suggest a need for improved evidence-based substance use disorder management, and strengthened continuity with primary and mental healthcare.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital , Substance-Related Disorders , Alberta/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Ontario/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Substance-Related Disorders/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hospital patients who use drugs may require prolonged parenteral antimicrobial therapy administered through a vascular access device (VAD). Clinicians' concerns that patients may inject drugs into these devices are well documented. However, the perspectives of patients on VAD injecting are not well described, hindering the development of informed clinical guidance. This study was conducted to elicit inpatient perspectives on the practice of injecting drugs into VADs and to propose strategies to reduce associated harms. METHODS: Researchers conducted a focused ethnography and completed semi-structured interviews with 25 inpatients at a large tertiary hospital in Western Canada that experiences a high rate of drug-related presentations annually. RESULTS: A few participants reported injecting into their VAD at least once, and nearly all had heard of the practice. The primary reason for injecting into a VAD was easier venous access since many participants had experienced significant vein damage from injection drug use. Several participants recognized the risks associated with injecting into VADs, and either refrained from the practice or took steps to maintain their devices while using them to inject drugs. Others were uncertain how the devices functioned and were unaware of potential harms. CONCLUSIONS: VADs are important for facilitating completion of parenteral antimicrobial therapy and for other medically necessary care. Prematurely discharging patients who inject into their VAD from hospital, or discontinuing or modifying therapy, results in inequitable access to health care for a structurally vulnerable patient population. Our findings demonstrate a need for healthcare provider education and non-stigmatizing clinical interventions to reduce potential harms associated with VAD injecting. Those interventions could include providing access to specialized pain and withdrawal management, opioid agonist treatment, and harm reduction services, including safer drug use education to reduce or prevent complications from injecting drugs into VADs.
Subject(s)
Substance Abuse, Intravenous , Substance-Related Disorders , Vascular Access Devices , Harm Reduction , Humans , Substance Abuse, Intravenous/epidemiology , Substance-Related Disorders/complications , Vulnerable PopulationsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We sought to examine the correlates for stimulant use in persons diagnosed with infectious syphilis during an outbreak in Alberta to help guide public health interventions. METHODS: Infectious syphilis data were extracted from the Communicable Disease and Outbreak Management database from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019. Behavioral, demographic, and lifetime reported stimulant use data were obtained. Descriptive analyses and logistic regression were performed for 3 subpopulations (gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men; men who have sex with women; and women). RESULTS: Of 3627 individuals diagnosed with infectious syphilis, 23.9% (n = 867) cases were not interviewed for substance use and were removed from further analysis. Of the remaining 2759 people, 41.8% (n = 1153) self-reported lifetime stimulant use. Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men reported stimulant use less often than women (24.6% vs. 44.1%; P < 0.0001) and men who have sex with women (24.6% vs. 46.2%; P < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that stimulant use was associated with persons who injected drugs, had correctional involvement, or reported multiple sex partners. Men who have sex with women were more likely to self-report First Nations ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio, 1.76 [95% confidence interval, 1.25-2.49]), and women were more likely to have a concurrent gonorrhea infection (adjusted odds ratio, 1.62 [95% confidence interval, 1.15-2.28]). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of infectious syphilis cases in Alberta reported lifetime nonprescription stimulant use. Infectious syphilis cases with stimulant use were associated with injection drug use, multiple sex partners, and correctional involvement. Our observations highlight the need for integration of sexual health services into programs for people who use substances and those in corrections custody.
Subject(s)
HIV Infections , Sexual and Gender Minorities , Syphilis , Alberta/epidemiology , Female , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Homosexuality, Male , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , Syphilis/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The factors that underlie persistent frequent visits to the emergency department are poorly understood. This study aimed to characterize people who visit emergency departments frequently in Ontario and Alberta, by number of years of frequent use. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study aimed at capturing information about patients visiting emergency departments in Ontario and Alberta, Canada, from Apr. 1, 2011, to Mar. 31, 2016. We identified people 18 years or older with frequent emergency department use (top 10% of emergency department use) in fiscal year 2015/16, using the Dynamic Cohort from the Canadian Institute of Health Information. We then organized them into subgroups based on the number of years (1 to 5) in which they met the threshold for frequent use over the study period. We characterized subgroups using linked emergency department, hospitalization and mental health-related hospitalization data. RESULTS: We identified 252 737 people in Ontario and 63 238 people in Alberta who made frequent visits to the emergency department. In Ontario and Alberta, 44.3% and 44.7%, respectively, met the threshold for frequent use in only 1 year and made 37.9% and 38.5% of visits; 6.8% and 8.2% met the threshold for frequent use over 5 years and made 11.9% and 13.2% of visits. Many characteristics followed gradients based on persistence of frequent use: as years of frequent visits increased (1 to 5 years), people had more comorbidities, homelessness, rural residence, annual emergency department visits, alcohol- and substance use-related presentations, mental health hospitalizations and instances of leaving hospital against medical advice. INTERPRETATION: Higher levels of comorbidities, mental health issues, substance use and rural residence were seen with increasing years of frequent emergency department use. Interventions upstream and in the emergency department must address unmet needs, including services for substance use and social supports.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital , Substance-Related Disorders , Alberta/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Substance-Related Disorders/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The population that visits emergency departments frequently is heterogeneous and at high risk for mortality. This study aimed to characterize these patients in Ontario and Alberta, compare them with controls who do not visit emergency departments frequently, and identify subgroups. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study that captured patients in Ontario or Alberta from fiscal years 2011/12 to 2015/16 in the Dynamic Cohort from the Canadian Institute for Health Information, which defined people with frequent visits to the emergency department in the top 10% of annual visits and randomly selected controls from the bottom 90%. We included patients 18 years of age or older and linked to emergency department, hospitalization, continuing care, home care and mental health-related hospitalization data. We characterized people who made frequent visits to the emergency department over time, compared them with controls and identified subgroups using cluster analysis. We examined emergency department visit acuity using the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale. RESULTS: The number of patients who made frequent visits to the emergency department ranged from 435 334 to 477 647 each year in Ontario (≥ 4 visits per year), and from 98 840 to 105 047 in Alberta (≥ 5 visits per year). The acuity of these visits increased over time. Those who made frequent visits to the emergency department were older and used more health care services than controls. We identified 4 subgroups of those who made frequent visits: "short duration" (frequent, regularly spaced visits), "older patients" (median ages 69 and 64 years in Ontario and Alberta, respectively; more comorbidities; and more admissions), "young mental health" (median ages 45 and 40 years in Ontario and Alberta, respectively; and common mental health-related and alcohol-related visits) and "injury" (increased prevalence of injury-related visits). INTERPRETATION: From 2011/12 to 2015/16, people who visited emergency departments frequently had increasing visit acuity, had higher health care use than controls, and comprised distinct subgroups. Emergency departments should codevelop interventions with the identified subgroups to address patient needs.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital , Adolescent , Adult , Alberta/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Inner city patients have a higher illness burden and need for care, but experience more unmet care needs. Hospital Addiction Medicine Consult Teams (AMCTs) are a promising emerging intervention. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of a Canadian AMCT-like intervention for inner city patients on reduction in high emergency department (ED) use, hospital admission, and inpatient length of stay. METHODS: Using a community-engaged, two-arm, pre-post, longitudinal quasi-experimental study design, 572 patients reporting active substance use, unstable housing, unstable income, or a combination thereof (302 at intervention site, 270 at control sites) were enrolled. Survey and administrative health service data were collected at baseline, six months post-enrolment, and 12 months post-enrolment. Multivariable regression models tested the intervention effect, adjusting for clinically important covariables (inpatient status at enrolment, medical complexity, age, gender, Indigenous identity, shelter use, opioid use). RESULTS: Initial bivariable analyses demonstrated an intervention effect on reduction in admissions and length of stay, however, this effect was no longer significant after adjusting for covariables. There was no evidence of reduction in high ED use on either bivariable or subsequent multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for covariables, no AMCT intervention effect was detected for reduction in high ED use, inpatient admission, or hospital length of stay. Further research is recommended to assess other patient-oriented intervention outcomes.
Subject(s)
Addiction Medicine , Opioid-Related Disorders , Canada , Hospitalization , Hospitals, Urban , HumansSubject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , COVID-19 , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
CONTEXT: Opioid-related harms continue to rise for children and youth. Analgesic prescribing decisions are challenging because the risk for future nonmedical opioid use or disorder is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To synthesize research examining the association between short-term therapeutic opioid exposure and future nonmedical opioid use or opioid use disorder and associated risk factors. DATA SOURCES: We searched 11 electronic databases. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers screened studies. Studies were included if: they were published in English or French, participants had short-term (≤14 days) or an unknown duration of therapeutic exposure to opioids before 18 years, and reported opioid use disorder or misuse. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted, and methodologic quality was assessed by 2 reviewers. Data were summarized narratively. RESULTS: We included 21 observational studies (49 944 602 participants). One study demonstrated that short-term therapeutic exposure may be associated with opioid abuse; 4 showed an association between medical and nonmedical opioid use without specifying duration of exposure. Other studies reported on prevalence or incidence of nonmedical use after medical exposure to opioids. Risk factors were contradictory and remain unclear. LIMITATIONS: Most studies did not specify duration of exposure and were of low methodologic quality, and participants might not have been opioid naïve. CONCLUSIONS: Some studies suggest an association between lifetime therapeutic opioid use and nonmedical opioid use. Given the lack of clear evidence regarding short-term therapeutic exposure, health care providers should carefully evaluate pain management options and educate patients and caregivers about safe, judicious, and appropriate use of opioids and potential signs of misuse.