Patient Perceptions About Opioid Risk Communications Within the Context of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Opioid overdose rates continue to increase, and extant literature suggests that many individuals who use heroin were first introduced to opioids through a medical prescription. Objective: To explore patient experiences related to decisions regarding analgesia after an emergency department visit within the context of a randomized clinical trial aimed to test the efficacy of risk communication interventions on treatment preference, risk recall, and use of opioids. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study of 36 patients making decisions regarding analgesia included qualitative interviews with participants in 2 risk intervention groups. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and edited to remove identifying information to protect the confidentiality of participants. Interviews were conducted from June 4, 2019, to August 6, 2019. We conducted thematic analysis from August to December 2019 using a mixed inductive and deductive approach. Participants received $20 in compensation. The study was conducted in 4 geographically diverse emergency departments in the United States. Participants were adults presenting to the emergency department with either musculoskeletal back or neck pain or kidney stone-related pain. Eligibility criteria included being aged 18 to 70 years, capable of providing informed consent, English speaking or having English comprehension, eligible for emergency department discharge within 24 hours of enrollment, and able to access email or a smartphone. Interventions: Participants enrolled from the main randomized clinical trial received 1 of 2 risk interventions: a probabilistic opioid risk tool or a narrative-enhanced probabilistic risk tool (ie, participants viewed eight 1- to 3-minute short videos of patients discussing their experiences with pain treatment and positive and negative experiences with opioid use). Main Outcomes and Measures: Factors reported by participants to have influenced their decision-making regarding acute pain and treatment. Results: Thirty-six participants were interviewed, 18 in the group who received the probabilistic risk tool alone and 18 in the group who received the additional narrative-enhanced probabilistic risk tool intervention. The median age was 38 years (range, 21-67 years), 22 individuals were female (61%), 14 were Black or African American (39%), and 14 were White (39%). Five themes emerged from the analysis in the following domains: the factors associated with the risk interventions; clinician paternalism; analgesia attributes and previous experiences; individual self-identity, attitudes, and values; and perceptions of clinician bias. Conclusions and Relevance: Most participants commented on the powerful lessons they learned from the risk interventions. More research is needed to understand how patients incorporate risk information into their decision-making process.

Consumer Views on Health Applications of Consumer Digital Data and Health Privacy Among US Adults: Qualitative Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, the number of internet users surpassed 4.6 billion. Individuals who create and share digital data can leave a trail of information about their habits and preferences that collectively generate a digital footprint. Studies have shown that digital footprints can reveal important information regarding an individual's health status, ranging from diet and exercise to depression. Uses of digital applications have accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic where public health organizations have utilized technology to reduce the burden of transmission, ultimately leading to policy discussions about digital health privacy. Though US consumers report feeling concerned about the way their personal data is used, they continue to use digital technologies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand the extent to which consumers recognize possible health applications of their digital data and identify their most salient concerns around digital health privacy. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with a diverse national sample of US adults from November 2018 to January 2019. Participants were recruited from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel, a nationally representative panel. Participants were asked to reflect on their own use of digital technology, rate various sources of digital information, and consider several hypothetical scenarios with varying sources and health-related applications of personal digital information. RESULTS: The final cohort included a diverse national sample of 45 US consumers. Participants were generally unaware what consumer digital data might reveal about their health. They also revealed limited knowledge of current data collection and aggregation practices. When responding to specific scenarios with health-related applications of data, they had difficulty weighing the benefits and harms but expressed a desire for privacy protection. They saw benefits in using digital data to improve health, but wanted limits to health programs' use of consumer digital data. CONCLUSIONS: Current privacy restrictions on health-related data are premised on the notion that these data are derived only from medical encounters. Given that an increasing amount of health-related data is derived from digital footprints in consumer settings, our findings suggest the need for greater transparency of data collection and uses, and broader health privacy protections.

Public libraries as partners in confronting the overdose crisis: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: The overdose crisis is affecting public libraries. In a 2017 survey of public librarians, half reported providing patrons support regarding substance use and mental health in the previous month, and 12% reported on-site drug overdose at their library in the previous year. Given the magnitude of the overdose crisis and the fact that public libraries host 1.4 billion visits annually, our aim was to understand how libraries currently assist with substance use and overdose and how they can further address these issues. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 44 public library staff from across the U.S. attending a national meeting in March 2018. Interviews addressed attitudes and experiences regarding drug use, overdose, and overdose response in libraries. We analyzed interviews using thematic content analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Results: Participants were from 26 states. Among libraries in this sample, 14% had experienced an on-site drug overdose and 7% stocked naloxone at the time of study. Nearly all participants reported substance use as a prominent concern among patrons and their families, as well as in the library itself. Many participants were willing to provide support to patrons and even administer naloxone, but they often lacked preparation, resources, or institutional support. Participants also expressed interest in providing information or referrals to people who use drugs (PWUD), but such efforts were often stymied by inadequate community resources. Finally, participants expressed interest in strengthening partnerships between public libraries and health and social service organizations. Conclusions and Relevance: Public library staff routinely engage PWUD, and based on prior studies, nearly 2,000 of U.S. public libraries can expect an on-site overdose in the next year. Findings from our work highlight the need for further study about how public libraries can act as part of comprehensive, community-based strategies to address the opioid epidemic.

Health Policy and Privacy Challenges Associated With Digital Technology.

Importance: Digital technology is part of everyday life. Digital interactions generate large amounts of data that can reveal information about the health of individual consumers (the digital health footprint). Objective: Τo describe health privacy challenges associated with digital technology. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this qualitative study, In-depth, semistructured, qualitative interviews were conducted with 26 key experts from diverse fields in the US between January 1 and July 31, 2018. Open-ended questions and hypothetical scenarios were used to identify sources of digital information that contribute to consumers' health-relevant digital footprints and challenges for health privacy. Participants also completed a survey instrument on which they rated the health relatedness of digital data sources. Main Outcomes and Measures: Health policy challenges associated with digital technology based on qualitative responses to expert interviews. Results: Although experts' ratings of digital data sources suggested a possible distinction between health and nonhealth data, qualitative interviews uniformly indicated that all data can be health data, particularly when aggregated across sources and time. Five key characteristics of the digital health footprint were associated with health privacy policy challenges: invisibility (people are unaware of how their data are tracked), inaccuracy (data in the digital health footprint can be inaccurate), immortality (data have no expiration date and are aggregated over time), marketability (data have immense commercial value and are frequently bought and sold), and identifiability (individuals can be readily reidentified and anonymity is nearly impossible to achieve). There are virtually no regulatory structures in the US to protect health privacy in the context of the digital health footprint. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that a sector-specific approach to digital technology privacy in the US may be associated with inadequate health privacy protections.

Local health departments and the implementation of evidence-based policies to address opioid overdose mortality.

BACKGROUND: In the context of the opioid overdose crisis, local health departments are on the front lines, coordinating programs and services and translating state and federal policies into community action. While media reports describe growth of Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) programs among local health departments, little is known about program features, scope, and target populations. Methods: We surveyed health departments in 180 United States counties with high overdose mortality rates. Results: Among health officials from 54 counties (30% response), many counties reported implementation of evidence-based practices, with a high degree of programmatic variation. The majority of responding health departments (94%) conducted overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs. Programs were heterogeneous in scale, with a reported median of 250 naloxone kits (range 1-25,000 kits) acquired for community distribution. In addition, four in five respondents were aware of their state's standing order policy for increasing naloxone access. While the majority of respondents reported county-level availability of at least one form of evidence-based medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD), many reported no availability of buprenorphine (33%) or methadone (43%). Conclusions: Local health departments are vital to reducing opioid overdose mortality, and many are implementing relevant evidence-based practices. To support further adoption of potentially life-saving strategies, health departments need adequate funding and staffing as well as policies and guidelines to support implementation.