Receipt of opioid use disorder treatments prior to fatal overdoses and comparison to no treatment in Connecticut, 2016-17.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative risk of death following exposure to treatments for OUD compared to no treatment. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study we compiled and merged state agency data on accidental and undetermined opioid overdose deaths in 2017 and exposures to OUD treatment in the prior six months to determine incidence rates following exposure to different treatment modalities. These rates were compared to the estimated incidence among those exposed to no treatment to determine relative risk of death for each treatment exposure. RESULTS: Incidence rates for opioid poisoning deaths for those exposed to treatment ranged from 6.06±1.40 per 1000 persons exposed to methadone to 17.36±3.22 per 1000 persons exposed to any non-medication treatment. The estimated incidence rate for those not exposed to treatment was 9.80±0.72 per 1000 persons. With no exposure to treatment as referent, exposure to methadone or buprenorphine reduced the relative risk by 38% or 34%, respectively; the relative risk of non-medication treatments was equal to or worse than no exposure to treatment (RR = 1.27-1.77). PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to non-MOUD treatments provided no protection against fatal opioid poisoning whereas the relative risk was reduced following exposures to MOUD treatment, even if treatment was not continued. Population level efforts to reduce opioid overdose deaths need to focus on expanding access to agonist-based MOUD treatments and are unlikely to succeed if access to non-MOUD treatments is made more available.

Leveraging a Learning Collaborative Model to Develop and Pilot Quality Measures to Improve Opioid Prescribing in the Emergency Department.

The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Emergency Medicine Quality Network (E-QUAL) Opioid Initiative was launched in 2018 to advance the dissemination of evidence-based resources to promote the care of emergency department (ED) patients with opioid use disorder. This virtual platform-based national learning collaborative includes a low-burden, structured quality improvement project, data benchmarking, tailored educational content, and resources designed to support a nationwide network of EDs with limited administrative and research infrastructure. As a part of this collaboration, we convened a group of experts to identify and design a set of measures to improve opioid prescribing practices to provide safe analgesia while reducing opioid-related harms. We present those measures here, alongside initial performance data on those measures from a sample of 370 nationwide community EDs participating in the 2019 E-QUAL collaborative. Measures include proportion of opioid administration in the ED, proportion of alternatives to opioids as first-line treatment, proportion of opioid prescription, opioid pill count per prescription, and patient medication safety education among ED visits for atraumatic back pain, dental pain, or headache. The proportion of benzodiazepine and opioid coprescribing for ED visits for atraumatic back pain was also evaluated. This project developed and effectively implemented a collection of 6 potential measures to evaluate opioid analgesic prescribing across a national sample of community EDs, representing the first feasibility assessment of opioid prescribing-related measures from rural and community EDs.

URINE TOXICOLOGY PROFILES OF EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT PATIENTS WITH UNTREATED OPIOID USE DISORDER: A MULTI-SITE VIEW.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose deaths in 2021 were the highest ever, driven by fentanyl and polysubstance use. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to characterize drug use, assessed by urine drug screens (UDSs), in patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD) presenting to 28 emergency departments (EDs) nationally and by region. METHODS: We analyzed UDSs from patients enrolled in the CTN-0099 ED-INNOVATION (Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine Validation) trial between July 12, 2020 and March 9, 2022. Participants were adult ED patients with OUD not engaged in addiction treatment with a UDS positive for an opioid, but negative for methadone. Sites were divided into "East" and "West" regions. RESULTS: A UDS was available for all 925 enrolled participants, 543 from East and 382 from West. Fentanyl was in 702 specimens (76%) (n = 485 [89%] East vs. n = 217 [57%] West; p < 0.01) and was the only opioid in 269 (29%). After fentanyl, the most common opioids were morphine (presumably heroin; n = 411 [44%]; n = 192 [35%] East vs. n = 219 [57%] West; p < 0.01) and buprenorphine (n = 329 [36%]; n = 186 [35%] East vs. n = 143 [37%] West; p = 0.32). The most common drugs found with opioids were stimulants (n = 545 [59%]), tetrahydrocannabinol (n = 417 [45%]), and benzodiazepines (n = 151 [16%]). Amphetamine-type stimulants were more common in West (n = 209 [55%] vs. East (n = 125 [23%]). Cocaine was more common in East (n = 223 [41%]) vs. West (n = 82 [21%]). The presence of multiple drugs was common (n = 759 [82%]). CONCLUSIONS: Most participants had UDS specimens containing multiple substances; a high proportion had fentanyl, stimulants, and buprenorphine. Regional differences were noted. Given the increased risk of death with fentanyl and polysubstance use, ED providers should be providing risk reduction counseling, treatment, and referral.

Homelessness and Treatment Outcomes Among Black Adults With Opioid Use Disorder: A Secondary Analysis of X:BOT.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with homelessnesss, and explore the relationship between homelessnesss and treatment outcomes among Black individuals. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of the subgroup of Black participants (n = 73) enrolled in "X:BOT," a 24-week multisite randomized clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of extended-release naltrexone versus sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone (n = 570). Outcomes included medication initiation, return to extramedical use of opioids assessed by both self-report and urine toxicology, and engagement in medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment at 28 weeks postrandomization. Descriptive statistics were performed. RESULTS: Black participants were mostly unmarried and male, and about a third were aged 21-30 years. Among people experiencing homelessnesss, more were uninsured (45.5% [10/22] vs 19.6% [10/51]), unemployed (77.3% [17/22] vs 64.7% [33/51]), and reported alcohol (40.9% [9/22] vs 23.5% [12/51]) and sedative use (54.5% [12/22] vs 17.6% [9/51]) within the previous 30 days. Compared with housed Black individuals, a slightly higher proportion of Black individuals experiencing homelessnesss successfully initiated study medication (81.1% [18/22] vs 72.6% [37/51]); similar proportions returned to opioid use during the trial (68.2% [15/22] vs 68.6% [35/51]) and were engaged in MOUD at 28 weeks after trial entry (72.2% [13/18] vs 69.7% [23/33]) among participants located for follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: These descriptive results among Black patients participating in a trial of MOUD suggest that efficacious MOUD is possible despite homelessnesss with additional clinical supports such as those provided by a clinical trial.

Early emergency department experience with 7-day extended-release injectable buprenorphine for opioid use disorder.

As the opioid overdose epidemic escalates, there is an urgent need for treatment innovations to address both patient and clinician barriers when initiating buprenorphine in the emergency department (ED). These include insurance status, logistical challenges such as the ability to fill a prescription and transportation, concerns regarding diversion, and availability of urgent referral sites. Extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) preparations such as a new 7-day injectable could potentially solve some of these issues. We describe the pharmacokinetics of a new 7-day XR-BUP formulation and the feasibility of its use in the ED setting. We report our early experiences with this medication (investigational drug CAM2038), in the context of an ongoing clinical trial entitled Emergency Department-Initiated BUP VAlidaTION (ED INNOVATION), to inform emergency clinicians as they consider incorporating this medication into their practice. The medication was approved by the European Medicines Agency in 2018 and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2023 for those 18 years or older for the treatment of moderate to severe opioid use disorder (OUD). We report our experience with approximately 800 ED patients with OUD who received the 7-day XR-BUP preparation in the ED between June 2020 and July 2023.

Perspectives on and experiences of emergency department-initiated buprenorphine among clinical pharmacists: A multi-site qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical pharmacists are well positioned to enhance efforts to promote emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder (OUD). Among clinical pharmacists in urban EDs, we sought to characterize barriers and facilitators for ED-initiated buprenorphine to inform future implementation efforts and enhance access to this highly effective OUD treatment. METHODS: This study was conducted as a part of Project ED Health (CTN-0069, NCT03023930), a multisite effectiveness-implementation study aimed at promoting ED-initiated buprenorphine that was conducted between April 2017 and July 2020. Data collection and analysis were grounded in the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework to assess perspectives on the relationship between 3 elements: evidence for buprenorphine, the ED context, and facilitation needs to promote ED-initiated buprenorphine. The study used an iterative coding process to identify overlapping themes within these 3 domains. RESULTS: The study conducted eight focus groups/interviews across four geographically disparate EDs with 15 pharmacist participants. We identified six themes. Themes related to evidence included (1) varied levels of comfort and experience among pharmacists with ED-initiated buprenorphine that increased over time and (2) a perception that patients with OUD have unique challenges that require guidance to optimize ED care. With regards to context, clinical pharmacists identified: (3) their ability to clarify scope of ED care in the context of unique pharmacology, formulations, and regulations of buprenorphine to ED staff, and that (4) their presence promotes successful program implementation and quality improvement. Participants identified facilitation needs including: (5) training to promote practice change and (6) ways to leverage already existing pharmacy resources outside of the ED. CONCLUSION: Clinical pharmacists play a unique and critical role in the efforts to promote ED-initiated buprenorphine. We identified 6 themes that can inform pharmacist-specific interventions that could aid in the successful implementation of this practice.

Perspectives of Clinicians and Staff at Community-Based Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Settings on Linkages With Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine Programs.

Importance: An increasing number of emergency departments (EDs) are initiating buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD) and linking patients to ongoing community-based treatment, yet community-based clinician and staff perspectives regarding this practice have not been characterized. Objective: To explore perspectives and experiences regarding ED-initiated buprenorphine among community-based clinicians and staff in geographically distinct regions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study reports findings from Project ED Health, a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation study designed to evaluate the impact of implementation facilitation on ED-initiated buprenorphine with referral to ongoing medication treatment. Clinicians and staff from community-based treatment programs were identified by urban academic EDs as potential referral sites for ongoing OUD treatment in 4 cities across the US in a formative evaluation as having the capability to continue medication treatment. Focus groups were held from April 1, 2018, to January 11, 2019, to examine community OUD treatment clinician and staff perspectives on accepting patients who have received ED-initiated buprenorphine. Data were analyzed from August 2020 to August 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Data collection and analysis were grounded in the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) implementation science framework, focusing on domains including evidence, context, and facilitation. Results: A total of 103 individuals (mean [SD] age, 45.3 [12.0] years; 76 female and 64 White) participated in 14 focus groups (groups ranged from 3-22 participants). Participants shared negative attitudes toward buprenorphine and variable attitudes toward ED-initiated buprenorphine. Prominent barriers included the community site treatment capacity and structure as well as payment and regulatory barriers. Perceived factors that could facilitate this model included additional substance use disorder training for ED staff, referrals and communication, greater inclusion of peer navigators, and addressing sociostructural marginalization that patients faced. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of community-based clinicians and staff positioned to deliver OUD treatment, participants reported many barriers to successful linkages for patients who received ED-initiated buprenorphine. Strategies to improve these linkages included educating communities and programs, modeling low-barrier philosophies, and using additional staff trained in addiction as resources to improve transitions from EDs to community partners.

Implementing Programs to Initiate Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in High-Need, Low-Resource Emergency Departments: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that implementation facilitation would enable us to rapidly and effectively implement emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine programs in rural and urban settings with high-need, limited resources and dissimilar staffing structures. METHODS: This multicenter implementation study employed implementation facilitation using a participatory action research approach to develop, introduce, and refine site-specific clinical protocols for ED-initiated buprenorphine and referral in 3 EDs not previously initiating buprenorphine. We assessed feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness by triangulating mixed-methods formative evaluation data (focus groups/interviews and pre/post surveys involving staff, patients, and stakeholders), patients' medical records, and 30-day outcomes from a purposive sample of 40 buprenorphine-receiving patient-participants who met research eligibility criteria (English-speaking, medically stable, locator information, nonprisoners). We estimated the primary implementation outcome (proportion receiving ED-initiated buprenorphine among candidates) and the main secondary outcome (30-day treatment engagement) using Bayesian methods. RESULTS: Within 3 months of initiating the implementation facilitation activities, each site implemented buprenorphine programs. During the 6-month programmatic evaluation, there were 134 ED-buprenorphine candidates among 2,522 encounters involving opioid use. A total of 52 (41.6%) practitioners initiated buprenorphine administration to 112 (85.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 79.7% to 90.4%) unique patients. Among 40 enrolled patient-participants, 49.0% (35.6% to 62.5%) were engaged in addiction treatment 30 days later (confirmed); 26 (68.4%) reported attending one or more treatment visits; there was a 4-fold decrease in self-reported overdose events (odds ratio [OR] 4.03; 95% CI 1.27 to 12.75). The ED clinician readiness increased by a median of 5.02 (95% CI: 3.56 to 6.47) from 1.92/10 to 6.95/10 (n(pre)=80, n(post)=83). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation facilitation enabled us to effectively implement ED-based buprenorphine programs across heterogeneous ED settings rapidly, which was associated with promising implementation and exploratory patient-level outcomes.

National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network Meeting Report: Advancing Emergency Department Initiation of Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder.

Opioid use disorder and opioid overdose deaths are a major public health crisis, yet highly effective evidence-based treatments are available that reduce morbidity and mortality. One such treatment, buprenorphine, can be initiated in the emergency department (ED). Despite evidence of efficacy and effectiveness for ED-initiated buprenorphine, universal uptake remains elusive. On November 15 and 16, 2021, the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network convened a meeting of partners, experts, and federal officers to identify research priorities and knowledge gaps for ED-initiated buprenorphine. Meeting participants identified research and knowledge gaps in 8 categories, including ED staff and peer-based interventions; out-of-hospital buprenorphine initiation; buprenorphine dosing and formulations; linkage to care; strategies for scaling ED-initiated buprenorphine; the effect of ancillary technology-based interventions; quality measures; and economic considerations. Additional research and implementation strategies are needed to enhance adoption into standard emergency care and improve patient outcomes.

Implementation Facilitation to Promote Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder.

Importance: Emergency department (ED)-initiated buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) is underused. Objective: To evaluate whether provision of ED-initiated buprenorphine with referral for OUD increased after implementation facilitation (IF), an educational and implementation strategy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multisite hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation nonrandomized trial compared grand rounds with IF, with pre-post 12-month baseline and IF evaluation periods, at 4 academic EDs. The study was conducted from April 1, 2017, to November 30, 2020. Participants were ED and community clinicians treating patients with OUD and observational cohorts of ED patients with untreated OUD. Data were analyzed from July 16, 2021, to July 14, 2022. Exposure: A 60-minute in-person grand rounds was compared with IF, a multicomponent facilitation strategy that engaged local champions, developed protocols, and provided learning collaboratives and performance feedback. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were the rate of patients in the observational cohorts who received ED-initiated buprenorphine with referral for OUD treatment (primary implementation outcome) and the rate of patients engaged in OUD treatment at 30 days after enrollment (effectiveness outcome). Additional implementation outcomes included the numbers of ED clinicians with an X-waiver to prescribe buprenorphine and ED visits with buprenorphine administered or prescribed and naloxone dispensed or prescribed. Results: A total of 394 patients were enrolled during the baseline evaluation period and 362 patients were enrolled during the IF evaluation period across all sites, for a total of 756 patients (540 [71.4%] male; mean [SD] age, 39.3 [11.7] years), with 223 Black patients (29.5%) and 394 White patients (52.1%). The cohort included 420 patients (55.6%) who were unemployed, and 431 patients (57.0%) reported unstable housing. Two patients (0.5%) received ED-initiated buprenorphine during the baseline period, compared with 53 patients (14.6%) during the IF evaluation period (P < .001). Forty patients (10.2%) were engaged with OUD treatment during the baseline period, compared with 59 patients (16.3%) during the IF evaluation period (P = .01). Patients in the IF evaluation period who received ED-initiated buprenorphine were more likely to be in treatment at 30 days (19 of 53 patients [35.8%]) than those who did not 40 of 309 patients (12.9%; P < .001). Additionally, there were increases in the numbers of ED clinicians with an X-waiver (from 11 to 196 clinicians) and ED visits with provision of buprenorphine (from 259 to 1256 visits) and naloxone (from 535 to 1091 visits). Conclusions and Relevance: In this multicenter effectiveness-implementation nonrandomized trial, rates of ED-initiated buprenorphine and engagement in OUD treatment were higher in the IF period, especially among patients who received ED-initiated buprenorphine. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03023930.

Incidence of Precipitated Withdrawal During a Multisite Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine Clinical Trial in the Era of Fentanyl.

This cohort study examines the incidence of precipitated withdrawal comparing traditional sublingual buprenorphine with a 7-day extended-release injectable initiated in the emergency department (ED).

Real-World Observational Evaluation of Common Interventions to Reduce Emergency Department Prescribing of Opioid Medications.

BACKGROUND: Prior work on opioid prescribing has examined dosing defaults, interruptive alerts, or "harder" stops such as electronic prescribing of controlled substances (EPCS), which has become increasingly required by state policy. Given that real-world opioid stewardship policies are concurrent and overlapping, the authors examined the effect of such policies on emergency department (ED) opioid prescriptions. METHODS: The researchers performed observational analysis of all ED visits discharged between December 17, 2016, and December 31, 2019, across seven EDs of a hospital system. Four interventions were examined in chronological order, with each successive intervention added on top of all previous interventions: 12-pill prescription default, EPCS, electronic health record (EHR) pop-up alert, and 8-pill prescription default. The primary outcome was opioid prescribing, which was described as number of opioid prescriptions per 100 discharged ED visits and modeled as a binary outcome for each visit. Secondary outcomes included prescription morphine milligram equivalents (MME) and non-opioid analgesia prescriptions. RESULTS: A total of 775,692 ED visits were included in the study. Compared to the preintervention period, cumulative reductions in opioid prescribing were seen with incremental interventions, including after adding a 12-pill default (odds ratio [OR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.94), after adding EPCS (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.63-0.77), after adding pop-up alerts (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.63-0.71), and after adding an 8-pill default (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.58-0.65). CONCLUSION: EHR-implemented solutions such as EPCS, pop-up alerts, and pill defaults had varying but significant effects on reducing ED opioid prescribing. Policy makers and quality improvement leaders might achieve sustainable improvements in opioid stewardship while balancing clinician alert fatigue through policy efforts promoting implementation of EPCS and default dispense quantities.

Concordance between controlled substance receipt and post-mortem toxicology in opioid-detected overdose deaths: A statewide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdoses are a leading cause of preventable death in the United States. There is limited research linking decedents' receipt of controlled substances and presence of controlled substances on post-mortem toxicology (PMT). METHODS: We linked data on opioid-detected deaths in Connecticut between May 3, 2016, and December 31, 2017 from the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, Department of Consumer Protection, and Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services. Exposure was defined as receipt of an opioid or benzodiazepine prescription within 90 days prior to death. Our primary outcome was concordance between medication received and metabolites in PMT. RESULTS: Our analysis included 1412 opioid-detected overdose deaths. 47 % received an opioid or benzodiazepine 90 days prior to death; 36 % received an opioid and 27 % received a benzodiazepine. Concordance between receipt of an opioid or benzodiazepine and its presence in PMT was observed in 30 % of opioid-detected deaths. Concordance with an opioid was present in 17 % of opioid-detected deaths and concordance with a benzodiazepine was present in 21 % of opioid-detected deaths. Receipt of an opioid or benzodiazepine and concordance with PMT were less common in fentanyl or heroin-detected deaths and more common in pharmaceutical opioid-detected deaths. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest medically supplied opioids and benzodiazepines potentially contributed to a substantial number, though minority, of opioid-detected deaths during the study period. Efforts to reduce opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing may reduce risk of opioid-detected deaths in this group, but other approaches will be needed to address most opioid-detected deaths that involved non-pharmaceutical opioids.

Missed Opportunities for HIV and Hepatitis C Screening Among Emergency Department Patients With Untreated Opioid Use Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the frequency of emergency department (ED) HIV and hepatitis C (HCV) screening in a high-risk cohort of ED patients with untreated opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: This analysis used data from a prospective, observational study of English-speaking adults with untreated OUD enrolled from April 2017 to December 2018 in 4 urban, academic EDs. Two cohorts were defined for this analysis by self-reported negative/unknown status for HIV (cohort 1) and HCV (cohort 2). Sites featured structured screening programs throughout the entire enrollment period for HIV and during at least part of the enrollment period for HCV. We calculated the proportion tested for HIV and HCV during the study enrollment ED visit. RESULTS: Among 394 evaluated ED patients, 328 of 394 (83.2%) were not tested for HIV or HCV and 244 of 393 (62.1%) lacked a usual medical care provider. In cohort 1, 375 reported negative or unknown HIV status; 59/375 (15.7%) overall and 33/218 (15.1%) of those reporting recent injection drug use were tested for HIV. In cohort 2, 231 reported negative of unknown HCV status; 22/231 (9.5%) overall and 9/98 (9.2%) of those reporting recent injection drug use were tested for HCV. The proportion tested by the ED ranged from 3% to 25% for HIV and 4% to 32% for HCV across study sites. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency department HIV and HCV screening remains infrequent among patients with untreated OUD, including those who inject drugs, even in EDs committed to screening. Targeted HIV/HCV screening should be considered as an adjunct strategy until the ideal of universal screening is more fully achieved.

Development and testing of data infrastructure in the American College of Emergency Physicians' Clinical Emergency Data Registry for opioid-related research.

Objective: Prior research has identified gaps in the capacity of electronic health records (EHRs) to capture the intricacies of opioid-related conditions. We sought to enhance the opioid data infrastructure within the American College of Emergency Physicians' Clinical Emergency Data Registry (CEDR), the largest national emergency medicine registry, through data mapping, validity testing, and feasibility assessment. Methods: We compared the CEDR data dictionary to opioid common data elements identified through prior environmental scans of publicly available data systems and dictionaries used in national informatics and quality measurement of policy initiatives. Validity and feasibility assessments of CEDR opioid-related data were conducted through the following steps: (1) electronic extraction of CEDR data meeting criteria for an opioid-related emergency care visit, (2) manual chart review assessing the quality of the extracted data, (3) completion of feasibility scorecards, and (4) qualitative interviews with physician reviewers and informatics personnel. Results: We identified several data gaps in the CEDR data dictionary when compared with prior environmental scans including urine drug testing, opioid medication, and social history data elements. Validity testing demonstrated correct or partially correct data for >90% of most extracted CEDR data elements. Factors affecting validity included lack of standardization, data incorrectness, and poor delimitation between emergency department (ED) versus hospital care. Feasibility testing highlighted low-to-moderate feasibility of date and social history data elements, significant EHR platform variation, and inconsistency in the extraction of common national data standards (eg, Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes). Conclusions: We found that high-priority data elements needed for opioid-related research and clinical quality measurement, such as demographics, medications, and diagnoses, are both valid and can be feasibly captured in a national clinical quality registry. Future work should focus on implementing structured data collection tools, such as standardized documentation templates and adhering to data standards within the EHR that would better characterize ED-specific care for opioid use disorder and related research.

Improving Uptake of Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine: Barriers and Solutions.

Emergency departments (ED) are increasingly providing buprenorphine to persons with opioid use disorder. Buprenorphine programs in the ED have strong support from public health leaders and emergency medicine specialty societies and have proven to be clinically effective, cost effective, and feasible. Even so, few ED buprenorphine programs currently exist. Given this imbalance between evidence-based practice and current practice, proven behavior change approaches can be used to guide local efforts to expand ED buprenorphine capacity. In this paper, we use the theory of planned behavior to identify and address the 1) clinician factors, 2) institutional factors, and 3) external factors surrounding ED buprenorphine implementation. By doing so, we seek to provide actionable and pragmatic recommendations to increase ED buprenorphine availability across different practice settings.

Resident attitudes, experiences, and preferences on initiating buprenorphine in the emergency department: A national survey.

Objectives: The objective was to describe emergency medicine (EM) resident attitudes, preferences, and experiences around the knowledge and skills around the evidence-based treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) in the emergency department (ED). Methods: We created an online survey that was distributed by the Emergency Medicine Residents' Association research committee listserv to approximately 6600 resident physicians at all levels of EM residency training. Data were collected between June 2020 and October 2020. This 12-question voluntary, anonymous survey included questions exploring EM resident preferences and experiences around the education and exposure to the evidence-based management of patients with OUD in the ED setting. Descriptive statistics were used. Results: A total of 288 of 6600 invited EM residents (response rate 4.4%) from 127 different EM residency programs across 38 states in the United States, District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico completed the survey. Most respondents (165/288; 57.3%) reported that it was "very important" for emergency physicians to have training to initiate buprenorphine treatment for patients with OUD. Just under half (140/288; 48.6%) reported they have or will receive X-waiver training during residency and 46.9% (135/288) reported experience prescribing buprenorphine in the ED. The estimated proportions of EM faculty at responding residents' primary teaching hospital with an X-waiver was "most or all" (48/285; 16.8%), "about half" (23/285; 8.1%), "a handful" (79/285; 27.7%), "one or two" (33/285; 11.6%), "none" (19/285; 6.7%), or "not sure" (83/285; 29.1%). Conclusion: Survey results suggest that resident emergency physicians perceive the evidence-based management of OUD to be relevant to EM residency training and are interested in receiving training on initiating medications for OUD treatment in the ED. Opportunities to improve resident education and clinical use of buprenorphine during ED residency training were identified.

Models for Implementing Emergency Department-Initiated Buprenorphine With Referral for Ongoing Medication Treatment at Emergency Department Discharge in Diverse Academic Centers.

There has been a substantial rise in the number of publications and training opportunities on the care and treatment of emergency department (ED) patients with opioid use disorder over the past several years. The American College of Emergency Physicians recently published recommendations for providing buprenorphine to patients with opioid use disorder, but barriers to implementing this clinical practice remain. We describe the models for implementing ED-initiated buprenorphine at 4 diverse urban, academic medical centers across the country as part of a federally funded effort termed "Project ED Health." These 4 sites successfully implemented unique ED-initiated buprenorphine programs as part of a comparison of implementation facilitation to traditional educational dissemination on the uptake of ED-initiated buprenorphine. Each site describes the elements central to the ED process, including screening, treatment initiation, referral, and follow-up, while harnessing organizational characteristics, including ED culture. Finally, we discuss common facilitators to program success, including information technology and electronic medical record integration, hospital-level support, strong connections with outpatient partners, and quality improvement processes.