Screening for problematic opioid use in the emergency department: Comparison of two screening measures.

Study objective: Earlier intervention for opioid use disorder (OUD) may reduce long-term health implications. Emergency departments (EDs) in the United States treat millions with OUD annually who may not seek care elsewhere. Our objectives were (1) to compare two screening measures for OUD characterization in the ED and (2) to determine the proportion of ED patients screening positive for OUD and those who endorse other substance use to guide future screening programs. Methods: A cross-sectional study of randomly selected adult patients presenting to three Midwestern US EDs were enrolled, with duplicate patients excluded. Surveys were administered via research assistant and documented on tablet devices. Demographics were self-reported, and OUD positivity was assessed by the DSM 5 checklist and the WHO ASSIST 3.1. The primary outcome was the concordance between two screening measures for OUD. Our secondary outcome was the proportion of ED patients meeting OUD criteria and endorsed co-occurring substance use disorder (SUD) criteria. Results: We enrolled 1305 participants; median age of participants was 46 years (range 18-84), with 639 (49.0%) Non-Hispanic, White, and 693 (53.1%) female. Current OUD positivity was identified in 17% (222 out of 1305) of the participants via either DSM-5 (two or more criteria) or ASSIST (score of 4 or greater). We found moderate agreement between the measures (kappa = 0.56; Phi coefficient = 0.57). Of individuals screening positive for OUD, 182 (82%) endorsed criteria for co-occurring SUD. Conclusions: OUD is remarkably prevalent in ED populations, with one in six ED patients screening positive. We found a high prevalence of persons identified with OUD and co-occurring SUD, with moderate agreement between measures. Developing and implementing clinically feasible OUD screening in the ED is essential to enable intervention.

A comparison of the effect of patient-specific versus weight-based protocols to treat vaso-occlusive episodes in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs) cause debilitating pain and are a common cause of emergency department (ED) visits, for people with sickle cell disease (SCD). Strategies for achieving optimal pain control vary widely despite evidence-based guidelines. We tested existing guidelines and hypothesized that a patient-specific pain protocol (PSP) written by their SCD provider may be more effective than weight-based (WB) dosing of parenteral opiate medication, in relieving pain. METHODS: This study was a prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing a PSP versus WB protocol for patients presenting with VOCs to six EDs. Patients were randomized to a PSP or WB protocol prior to an ED visit. The SCD provider wrote their protocol and placed it in the electronic health record for future ED visits with VOC exclusion criteria that included preexisting PSP excluding parenteral opioid analgesia or outpatient use of buprenorphine or methadone or highly suspected for COVID-19. Pain intensity scores, side effects, and safety were obtained every 30 min for up to 6 h post-ED bed placement. The primary outcome was change in pain intensity score from placement in an ED space to disposition or 6 h. RESULTS: A total of 328 subjects were randomized; 104 participants enrolled (ED visit, target n = 230) with complete data for 96 visits. The study was unable to reach the target sample size and stopped early due to the impact of COVID-19. We found no significant differences between groups in the primary outcome; patients randomized to a PSP had a shorter ED length of stay (p = 0.008), and the prevalence of side effects was low in both groups. Subjects in both groups experienced both a clinically meaningful and a statistically significant decrease in pain (27 mm on a 0- to 100-mm scale). CONCLUSIONS: We found a shorter ED length of stay for patients assigned to a PSP. Patients in both groups experienced good pain relief without significant side effects.

Evaluation of a large-scale health department naloxone distribution program: Per capita naloxone distribution and overdose morality.

OBJECTIVES: To report per-capita distribution of take-home naloxone to lay bystanders and evaluate changes in opioid overdose mortality in the county over time. METHODS: Hamilton County Public Health in southwestern Ohio led the program from Oct 2017-Dec 2019. Analyses included all cartons distributed within Hamilton County or in surrounding counties to people who reported a home address within Hamilton County. Per capita distribution was estimated using publicly available census data. Opioid overdose mortality was compared between the period before (Oct 2015-Sep 2017) and during (Oct 2017-Sep 2019) the program. RESULTS: A total of 10,416 cartons were included for analyses, with a total per capita distribution of 1,275 cartons per 100,000 county residents (average annual rate of 588/100,000). Median monthly opioid overdose mortality in the two years before (28 persons, 95% CI 25-31) and during (26, 95% CI 23-28) the program did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Massive and rapid naloxone distribution to lay bystanders is feasible. Even large-scale take-home naloxone distribution may not substantially reduce opioid overdose mortality rates.

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.

Genetic Variants Associated With Opioid Use Disorder.

Genetics are presumed to contribute 30-40% to opioid use disorder (OUD), allowing for the possibility that genetic markers could be used to identify personal risk for developing OUD. We aimed to test the potential association among 180 candidate single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), 120 of which were related to the dopamine reward pathway and 60 related to pharmacokinetics. Participants were randomly recruited in 2020-2021 in a cross-sectional genetic association study. Self-reported health history including Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) OUD criteria and buccal swabs were collected. A total of 1,301 participants were included in the analyses for this study. Of included participants, 250 met the DSM-5 criteria for ever having OUD. Logistic regression, adjusting for age and biologic sex, was used to characterize the association between each SNP and DSM-5 criteria consistent with OUD. Six SNPs found in four genes were associated with OUD: increased odds with CYP3A5 (rs15524 and rs776746) and DRD3 (rs324029 and rs2654754), and decreased odds with CYP3A4 (rs2740574) and CYP1A2 (rs2069514). Homozygotic CYP3A5 (rs15524 and rs776746) had the highest adjusted odds ratio of 2.812 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.737, 4.798) and 2.495 (95% CI 1.670, 3.835), respectively. Variants within the dopamine reward and opioid metabolism pathways have significant positive (DRD3 and CYP3A5) and negative (CYP3A4 and CYP1A2) associations with OUD. Identification of these variants provides promising possibilities for genetic prognostic and therapeutic targets for future investigation.

Predicting at-risk opioid use three months after ed visit for trauma: Results from the AURORA study.

OBJECTIVE: Whether short-term, low-potency opioid prescriptions for acute pain lead to future at-risk opioid use remains controversial and inadequately characterized. Our objective was to measure the association between emergency department (ED) opioid analgesic exposure after a physical, trauma-related event and subsequent opioid use. We hypothesized ED opioid analgesic exposure is associated with subsequent at-risk opioid use. METHODS: Participants were enrolled in AURORA, a prospective cohort study of adult patients in 29 U.S., urban EDs receiving care for a traumatic event. Exclusion criteria were hospital admission, persons reporting any non-medical opioid use (e.g., opioids without prescription or taking more than prescribed for euphoria) in the 30 days before enrollment, and missing or incomplete data regarding opioid exposure or pain. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the relationship between ED opioid exposure and at-risk opioid use, defined as any self-reported non-medical opioid use after initial ED encounter or prescription opioid use at 3-months. RESULTS: Of 1441 subjects completing 3-month follow-up, 872 participants were included for analysis. At-risk opioid use occurred within 3 months in 33/620 (5.3%, CI: 3.7,7.4) participants without ED opioid analgesic exposure; 4/16 (25.0%, CI: 8.3, 52.6) with ED opioid prescription only; 17/146 (11.6%, CI: 7.1, 18.3) with ED opioid administration only; 12/90 (13.3%, CI: 7.4, 22.5) with both. Controlling for clinical factors, adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for at-risk opioid use after ED opioid exposure were: ED prescription only: 4.9 (95% CI 1.4, 17.4); ED administration for analgesia only: 2.0 (CI 1.0, 3.8); both: 2.8 (CI 1.2, 6.5). CONCLUSIONS: ED opioids were associated with subsequent at-risk opioid use within three months in a geographically diverse cohort of adult trauma patients. This supports need for prospective studies focused on the long-term consequences of ED opioid analgesic exposure to estimate individual risk and guide therapeutic decision-making.

Acceptance of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) referral among a sample of PrEP-eligible emergency department patients.

OBJECTIVE: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PreP) reduces the rate of HIV transmission in high-risk groups. Emergency departments (EDs) frequently encounter patients at risk for HIV acquisition who are eligible for PrEP. ED HIV screening programs have prioritized testing and linkage to care for patients who test positive, but fail to refer HIV-negative patients to PrEP clinicians. Our objective was to estimate referral acceptance to a PrEP clinician among a sample of at-risk ED patients. METHODS: This single-center cross-sectional study electronically queried a prospectively acquired dataset of survey responses from a sample of patients presenting to an urban academic ED from March 2019 to February 2020. Patients completed a risk assessment as part of the HIV screening program. PrEP eligibility was based off survey responses in accordance with 2017 CDC PrEP eligibility criteria. Identified PrEP-eligible patients completed a PrEP questionnaire. The primary outcome was the proportion of PrEP-eligible patients who accepted referral to a PrEP clinician during their ED encounter. We secondarily report patient participant characteristics including the proportion of PrEP-eligible patients who were aware of and were knowledgeable about PrEP as a method to prevent transmission of HIV. RESULTS: In total, 360 patients completed a PrEP questionnaire, of which 287 (80%) were not currently taking PrEP and eligible for PrEP referral. 57% were males, with 41% Black/African American. Of the 287 eligible for PrEP, 61 (21.3%, 95% CI: 16.8-26.5) indicated awareness of PrEP, of which, 49 (80.3%, 95% CI: 67.8-89.0) demonstrated accurate knowledge of PrEP. PrEP referral was offered to 238 (82.9%, 95% CI: 78.0-87.0) patients, of which, 76 (31.9%, 95% CI: 26.1-38.3) accepted. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one third of PrEP-eligible ED patients accepted PrEP referral during their ED encounter, demonstrating an opportunity for increased PrEP education and intentional referral for eligible patients. Variability in PrEP acceptability by demographic and risk subgroup may be an important consideration in efforts to expand PrEP utilization.

Experiences of Transgender and Gender Expansive Physicians.

Importance: Although LGBTQIA+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual and gender minority) physicians experience bias in the workplace, there is a paucity of data on the experiences of physicians who identify specifically as transgender and/or gender expansive (TGE; gender expansive is an umbrella term encompassing individuals and gender identities that may exist beyond the binary framework [eg, may include nonbinary, genderqueer, and agender individuals]). Objectives: To explore the professional experiences of TGE physicians, identify barriers to inclusion, and highlight stakeholder-derived strategies that promote an inclusive workplace. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study informed by semistructured interviews was conducted among 24 TGE physicians in the US from April 1 to December 31, 2021. The sample of TGE physicians was recruited using convenience and snowball sampling. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Using thematic analysis, at least 2 members of the research team performed blinded coding of each transcript, in an iterative process. Main Outcomes and Measures: Data collection and thematic analysis examining themes of physicians' experiences. Results: Among 24 physicians (mean [SD] age, 39 [1.4] years) interviewed, 8 (33%) self-identified as transgender women, 7 (29%) as transgender men, 4 (17%) as nonbinary, 3 (13%) as transgender and nonbinary, and 2 (8%) as genderqueer. Prominent themes of the interviews included emotional distress as a result of transphobia, dominance of a rigid binary gender paradigm, and structural and institutional factors that are associated with psychological and physical safety and feelings of isolation as a TGE physician. Clear steps of affirmation were identified that could mitigate the emotional stressors, including signs of safety, active allyship, and mentorship by other TGE physicians. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, TGE physicians reported facing both overt and subtle biases associated with their identity and gender presentation. Participants also noted several interpersonal and structural factors that mitigate the effect of these biases.

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.

Patient Pain Experiences and the Emergency Department Encounter: A Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Legislation, practice recommendations, and the likely link between therapeutic opioid exposure and iatrogenic opioid use disorder (OUD) have led to reduced opioid prescribing. The effects of this change on unrelieved pain and the overdose crisis are not well-characterized. AIM: We explored emergency department (ED) patients' beliefs and experiences involving pain and emergency care to inform the development of future psychosocial interventions that balance the need for acute pain management with risks from opioid exposure. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted after discharge from an urban, academic Level 1 trauma center ED from September 2020 to May 2021 with 18 adult patients presenting with acute pain. After transcription of audio recording, common themes were identified using framework analysis. Thematic hierarchy was validated with Pearson correlation coefficients for cluster analysis of word similarity. RESULTS: Of the 18 participants, most were Black (n = 11, 61%) and male (n = 12, 66.7%). Analysis identified one overarching theme: locus of control with an emergency pain encounter. Four themes were identified surrounding internal and external influences on pain management: (1) accessing healthcare for acute pain; (2) managing the pain after discharge; (3) seeking opioids: self-medicating and misuse; and (4) opioid crisis makes people in pain suffer. CONCLUSIONS: Patients discharged from the ED reported unrelieved pain, factors that influence their pain management, and an ability to seek opioids from non-medical sources. There is a significant disconnect between patients and providers in terms of priorities in pain management and the importance of individualized care.

Guidelines for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department 2 (GRACE-2): Low-risk, recurrent abdominal pain in the emergency department.

This second Guideline for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-2) from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine is on the topic "low-risk, recurrent abdominal pain in the emergency department." The multidisciplinary guideline panel applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations regarding four priority questions for adult emergency department patients with low-risk, recurrent, undifferentiated abdominal pain. The intended population includes adults with multiple similar presentations of abdominal signs and symptoms recurring over a period of months or years. The panel reached the following recommendations: (1) if a prior negative computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis (CTAP) has been performed within 12 months, there is insufficient evidence to accurately identify populations in whom repeat CTAP imaging can be safely avoided or routinely recommended; (2) if CTAP with IV contrast is negative, we suggest against ultrasound unless there is concern for pelvic or biliary pathology; (3) we suggest that screening for depression and/or anxiety may be performed during the ED evaluation; and (4) we suggest an opioid-minimizing strategy for pain control. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The GRACE-2 writing group developed clinically relevant questions to address the care of adult patients with low-risk, recurrent, previously undifferentiated abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED). Four patient-intervention-comparison-outcome-time (PICOT) questions were developed by consensus of the writing group, who performed a systematic review of the literature and then synthesized direct and indirect evidence to formulate recommendations, following GRADE methodology. The writing group found that despite the commonality and relevance of these questions in emergency care, the quantity and quality of evidence were very limited, and even fundamental definitions of the population and outcomes of interest are lacking. Future research opportunities include developing precise and clinically relevant definitions of low-risk, recurrent, undifferentiated abdominal pain and determining the scope of the existing populations in terms of annual national ED visits for this complaint, costs of care, and patient and provider preferences.

HealthCare educational differences in pain management, adverse childhood experiences and their relationship to substance use disorder education.

BACKGROUND: In order to assist the State of Ohio in the United States in addressing the opioid epidemic, the Ohio Attorney General appointed experts in a variety of academic disciplines to the Scientific Committee on Opioid Prevention and Education (SCOPE). The focus of SCOPE is the application of scientific principles in the development of prevention and educational strategies for reducing substance use disorder (SUD). One area of focus for SCOPE was SUD education of healthcare professionals. The objective of the present was to identify the content and extent to which future healthcare professionals are trained in pain management, SUD, and adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). METHODS: In December of 2019, a survey was distributed to 49 healthcare professional schools in Ohio that included the following disciplines: medicine, pharmacy, advanced practice registered nurse (APRN), physician assistant, dentistry, and optometry. The survey included four domains: initial screening of patients, training in SUD, training in care for patients at high risk for SUD, and education in evaluating patients for ACEs. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: Thirty one of the forty-nine schools completed the survey. Most disciplines indicated that some form of basic training in the principles of SUD were taught in their core curriculum. The training on ethical issues surrounding SUD were not as widely covered (range 0-62.5%). Medicine, APRN, physician assistant, and pharmacy schools had a "moderate" to "great" extent of pharmacologic therapy curriculum integration. Other pain management strategies were "somewhat" to "moderately" integrated. There were variations seen in training on risk of medication misuse based on various contributors to health. At least 67.7% of medicine, APRN, physician assistant, and pharmacy programs included motivational interviewing training. The extent to which schools integrated education regarding ACEs into their curriculum varied from 0 to 66.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The study finding suggests a need for a unified, consistent, and expanded training requirement in the foundations of pain management, SUD, and ACEs in professional healthcare education.

Opioid-Related Risk Screening Measures for the Emergency Care Setting.

Efforts to minimize the impact of prescribed opioids on future adverse outcomes are reliant on emergency care providers' ability to screen and detect opioid use disorder (OUD). Many prescriptions are initiated in the emergency department (ED) for acute pain; thus, validated measures are especially needed. Our systematic review describes the available opioid-related screening measures identified through search of the available literature. Measures were categorized by intent and applied clinical setting. We found 44 articles, identifying 15 screening measures. Of these, nine were developed to screen for current opioid misuse and five to screen for risk of future opioid misuse. None were created for use outside of a chronic pain setting. Many measures were applied differently from intended purpose. Although several measures are available, screening for adverse opioid outcomes in the ED is hampered by lack of validated instruments. Development of clarified conceptual models and ED-specific research is necessary to limit OUD.

Systematic review of Pharmacogenomics Knowledgebase evidence for pharmacogenomic links to the dopamine reward pathway for heroin dependence.

Genetics play an important role in opioid use disorder (OUD); however, few specific gene variants have been identified. Therefore, there is a need to further understand the pharmacogenomics influences on the pharmacodynamics of opioids. The Pharmacogenomics Knowledgebase (PharmGKB), a database that links genetic variation and drug interaction in the body, was queried to identify polymorphisms associated with heroin dependence in the context of opioid related disorders/OUD. Eight genes with 22 variants were identified as linked to increased risk of heroin dependence, with three genes and variants linked to decreased risk, although the level of evidence was moderate to low. Therefore, continued exploration of biomarker influences on OUD, reward pathways and other contributing circuitries is necessary to understand the true impact of genetics on OUD before integration into clinical guidelines.

Incidence of opioid use disorder in the year after discharge from an emergency department encounter.

OBJECTIVE: Therapeutic opioid exposure is associated with long-term use. How much later use is due to opioid use disorder (OUD) and the incidence of OUD without preceding therapeutic exposure are unknown. We preliminarily explored the association between emergency department opioid prescriptions and subsequent OUD. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study queried electronic health records for discharged adult patients in the year before (2014) and after (2016) their first encounter in 2015 at either of 2 EDs in a Midwestern healthcare system. OUD was defined by diagnosis codes and prescription history. Patients with OUD history before the index encounter were excluded. We report OUD incidence within 1 year, with time to first indicator of OUD among those with a repeat health system encounter post index using a Cox proportional hazards model. Secondary outcomes were sources of therapeutic opioid exposure and frequency of risk factors associated with OUD among those who developed OUD. RESULTS: Of the 49,904 unique, adult ED patients without history of OUD, 669 (1.3%; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4) had health records indicating OUD within 12 months. The proportion of ED patients with OUD at 12 months was 1.5% (95% CI, 1.2-1.9) if prescribed an opioid at index and 1.3% (95% CI, 1.2-1.4) if not. Of the 669 who developed OUD, 80 (12.0%) were prescribed an opioid at the index ED visit, 54 (8%) received an opioid prescription at a subsequent ED visit, and median time to OUD was 4.5 months (interquartile range 1.6-7.6, range 0.0-11.9). When controlling for demographics, mental health, and prior opioid prescriptions, there was no difference in OUD incidence between patients who did or did not receive an initial ED opioid prescription (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.4). CONCLUSIONS: A small but meaningful proportion of the ED population will develop OUD within 1 year even without ED opioid prescription. Though we found no association between ED opioid prescription and later OUD, further study is warranted given the complexity factors influencing OUD incidence, ongoing ED opioid exposure, and limitations inherent to this study design.

Emergency Nurse Perceptions of Pain and Opioids in the Emergency Department.

The opioid crisis is a national health emergency with immense morbidity, mortality, and socioeconomic cost. Emergency department (ED) pain management is tightly linked to the issue of opioid use disorder (OUD), because opioid exposure is necessary for development of OUD. Emergency nurses are on the frontlines of this complex problem, yet little, if any, attention has been paid to the role they play in the prevention and management of either pain or OUD in this unique and important setting. A framework that conceptualizes and optimizes emergency nurses as change agents in the opioid epidemic is urgently needed. While ED pain management and OUD prevention is dependent on the entire care team, this innovative study qualitatively characterizes emergency nurse perceptions of pain management, OUD prevention, and their potential role in each. Content analysis produced 14 categories that were clustered into two themes, "nurses influence ED pain management" and "adjustments in ED pain management", and an overarching message that "pain management depends on the care team." By generating a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the role played by emergency nurses, our findings provide essential insights into potential interventions and frameworks.

Higher daily pain severity after emergency department visits is associated with lower return-to-work rates.

BACKGROUND: Pain can impair functional status, including a patient's ability to return to work. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was an association between pain levels and return-to-work status during the first 4 days post-ED discharge in ED patients seen for undifferentiated acute pain. METHODS: This secondary analysis of data from the Acute Management of Pain from the Emergency Department (AMPED) registry included patients who reported working either full-time or part-time. We used Cox regression models to examine the association between daily self-reported minimum and maximum pain scores and first return to work. We used repeated measures logistic regression models to examine the association between daily minimum and maximum pain scores and daily return-to-work status. RESULTS: Of the 610 employed patients, 481 (78.9%) were employed full-time and 129 (21.1%) part-time. The average delay in returning to work after ED visit was 2.4 days. For all models, higher minimum and maximum daily pain scores predicted lower daily return-to-work rates in the first four days post-ED discharge. The adjusted hazards ratios for first return to work were 0.91 (0.87, 0.96) and 0.93 (0.89, 0.97), while the adjusted odds ratios for daily return-to-work status were 0.80 (0.75, 0.85) and 0.88 (0.83, 0.93) for every one-point increase in minimum and maximum pain scores, respectively. CONCLUSION: Higher daily pain severity is associated with decreased return-to-work after ED visits for acute pain, highlighting the importance of adequate discharge pain management from the ED.

Trial design of comparing patient-specific versus weight-based protocols to treat vaso-occlusive episodes in sickle cell disease (COMPARE-VOE).

OBJECTIVES: Painful vaso-occlusive episodes (VOE) are the most common reason for emergency department (ED) visits experienced by patients with sickle cell disease (SCD). The National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) evidence-based recommendations for VOE treatment are based primarily on expert opinion. In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), we will compare changes in pain scores between patients randomized to a patient-specific analgesic protocol versus those randomized to a weight-based analgesic protocol, as recommended by the NHLBI guidelines. METHODS: We report the rationale and design of a multi-site, phase III, single-blinded, RCT to be conducted in six EDs in the United States. Eligible participants will be randomized after providing consent, anticipating 50% of those randomized would have an ED visit during the enrollment period. A total of 230 participants with one VOE ED visit provides sufficient power to detect a clinically significant difference in pain score reductions of 14 between groups with 0.05 type I error. Uniquely, this trial randomizes participants in a larger population than the study population, given the impossibility of consenting and randomizing participants during emergencies. The primary endpoint is the change in pain scores in the ED from time of placement in treatment area to time of disposition (hospitalization, discharged home, or assigned to observation status) or a maximum treatment duration of 6 hours. Additional outcomes include hospitalizations and ED visits seven days post enrollment, side effects, and safety assessments. CONCLUSIONS: The COMPARE-VOE study design will provide high-level evidence to support the NHLBI VOE treatment guidelines.

Naloxone provision to emergency department patients recognized as high-risk for opioid use disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are at increased risk for overdose and death. Clinical practice guidelines and professional organization policy statements recommend providing naloxone to patients at risk for overdose. We sought to characterize fidelity to naloxone practice recommendations in a cohort of Emergency Department (ED) patients in whom opioid use disorder was suspected by the treating physician. METHODS: This single-center cross-sectional study evaluated electronic health records from an urban academic ED with 73,000 annual encounters in a region with a high prevalence of OUD. Patients ≥18 years old with encounters from January 1, 2018 to November 30, 2019 were included if discharged from the ED and either administered buprenorphine in the ED or referred to outpatient substance use treatment. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of included patients provided naloxone (take-home or prescription). We used random effects multivariable logistic regression (accounting for multiple patient encounters) to estimate the odds ratio (OR) for receiving naloxone. RESULTS: Of 1036 eligible patient encounters, 320 resulted in naloxone provision (30.9%, 95% CI: 28.1-33.8). Naloxone provision occurred for 33.6% (95% CI 30.5-36.7) of 900 patients referred to outpatient substance use treatment without ED buprenorphine administration, 10.6% (95% CI 5.0-19.2) of 85 patients administered buprenorphine and not referred to outpatient substance use treatment, and 17.6% (95% CI 8.4-30.9) of 51 patients administered buprenorphine and referred to outpatient treatment. After controlling for age, sex, race, and prior provision of naloxone, the administration of buprenorphine was associated with a 94% lower odds (aOR = 0.06 [95% CI 0.011-0.33]) for naloxone provision compared to those only referred to outpatient treatment. CONCLUSION: A majority of ED patients who received an intervention targeted at OUD, in an ED where take-home naloxone is freely available, did not receive either take-home naloxone or a prescription for naloxone at discharge. Patients receiving buprenorphine were less likely to receive naloxone than patients only referred to outpatient treatment. These data suggest barriers other than recognition of potential OUD and naloxone availability impact provision of naloxone and argue for a treatment "bundle" as a conceptual model for care of ED patients with suspected OUD.