RESUMO
Aims: To determine the cost-effectiveness of pharmacy-based intranasal (IN) and intramuscular (IM) naloxone distribution in Canada. Methods: We developed a state-transition model for pharmacy-based naloxone distribution, every 3 years, to illicit, prescription, opioid-agonist therapy and nonopioid use populations compared to no naloxone distribution. We used a monthly cycle length, lifetime horizon and a Canadian provincial Ministry of Health perspective. Transition probabilities, cost and utility data were retrieved from the literature. Costs (2020) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were discounted 1.5% annually. Microsimulation, 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: Distribution of naloxone to all Canadians compared to no distribution prevented 151 additional overdose deaths per 10,000 persons, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $50,984 per QALY for IM naloxone and an ICER of $126,060 per QALY for IN naloxone. Distribution of any naloxone to only illicit opioid users was the most cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that survival rates for illicit opioid users were most influenced by the availability of either emergency medical services or naloxone. Conclusion: Distribution of IM and IN naloxone to all Canadians every 3 years is likely cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $140,000 Canadian dollars/QALY (~3 × gross domestic product from the World Health Organization). Distribution to people who use illicit opioids was most cost-effective and prevented the most deaths. This is important, as more overdose deaths could be prevented through nationwide public funding of IN naloxone kits through pharmacies, since individuals report a preference for IN naloxone and these formulations are easier to use, save lives and are cost-effective. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2024;157:xx-xx.
RESUMO
Background: The opioid crisis is a public health concern in Canada with a continued rise in deaths and presents a significant economic impact on the healthcare system. There is a need to develop and implement strategies for decreasing the risk of opioid overdoses and other opioid-related harms resulting from the use of prescription opioids. Pharmacists, as medication experts and educators, and as one of the most accessible frontline healthcare providers, are well positioned to provide effective opioid stewardship through a pain management program focused on improving pain management for patients, supporting appropriate prescribing and dispensing of opioids, and supporting safe and appropriate use of opioids to minimize potential opioid misuse, abuse, and harm. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and grey literature to determine the characteristics of an effective community pharmacy-based pain management program, including the facilitators and barriers to be considered. Discussion: An effective pain management program should be multicomponent, address other co-morbid conditions in addition to pain, and contain a continuing education component for pharmacists. Solutions to implementation barriers, including pharmacy workflow; addressing attitudes beliefs, and stigma; and pharmacy remuneration, as well as leveraging the expansion of scope from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act exemption to facilitate implementation, should be considered. Conclusions: Future work should include the development, implementation, and evaluation of a multicomponent, evidence-based intervention strategy in Canadian community pharmacies to demonstrate the impact pharmacists can have on the management of chronic pain and as one potential solution to helping curb the opioid crisis. Future studies should measure associated costs for such a program and any resulting cost-savings to the healthcare system.
RESUMO
The number of opioid-related deaths in Canada has steadily increased since 2016 and the COVID-19 pandemic has worsened this trend. Naloxone has been pivotal for reducing opioid-related harms and death, and pharmacists play a crucial role in ensuring the supply of naloxone to Canadians through community pharmacies. However, naloxone dispensing by pharmacists is not optimal; in fact, in Ontario, only 50% of pharmacists offer naloxone, despite national guidelines that pharmacists should offer naloxone to everyone with an opioid prescription. When asked why pharmacists do not proactively offer naloxone, recent research has identified that pharmacists need continuing education to boost confidence and knowledge on how to start conversations with patients. The study involves a delayed start, double-blind randomized controlled trial, for Canadian licensed pharmacists and pharmacy technicians. The goals of the program are to increase Canadian pharmacy professional's knowledge, confidence, and motivation to proactively offer naloxone, as well as to decrease stigma associated with naloxone. The program incorporates behaviour change techniques from the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Theory of Planned Behaviour. The intervention program includes three modules that focus on improving pharmacists' communication skills by teaching them how to proactively offer naloxone, while the control group will complete a reading assignment on the naloxone consensus guidelines. The program will involve a process and outcome evaluation in addition to a contribution analysis. This program is important for breaking down previously identified barriers and knowledge gaps for why pharmacists currently do not proactively offer naloxone. This study will provide important new information about what behaviour change techniques are successful in improving confidence and motivation in the pharmacy profession and in an online environment. Findings from this study can be used to produce a national naloxone education program that can also be implemented into current pharmacy school curriculum.
RESUMO
A recent report found that the number of opioid-related deaths in Ontario in the first 15 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic was 38.2% higher than in the 15 weeks before the pandemic. Our study sought to determine if pharmacy professionals self-reported an increase or decrease in naloxone provision due to the pandemic and to identify adjustments made by pharmacy professionals to dispense naloxone during the pandemic. A total of 231 Ontario community pharmacy professionals completed an online survey. Pharmacy professionals' barriers, facilitators, and comfort level with dispensing naloxone before and during the pandemic were identified. The sample consisted of mostly pharmacists (99.1%). Over half (51.1%) reported no change in naloxone dispensing, while 22.9% of respondents reported an increase and 24.7% a decrease. The most common adjustments made during the pandemic were training patients how to administer naloxone over video or phone, delivering naloxone kits, and pharmacy technicians offering naloxone at prescription intake. Over half (55%) of participants said the top barrier for dispensing was that patients did not request naloxone. Naloxone distribution through pharmacies could be further optimized to address the increased incidence of overdose deaths during the pandemic. Future research should investigate the reasons for changes in naloxone dispensing.
RESUMO
A variety of new sources describing community pharmacy-based take-home naloxone (THN) programs have emerged recently in the literature. There is a need to define the types of take-home naloxone programs being offered to support future research designs in implementing and evaluating standardized programs that fill pharmacist and patient knowledge gaps and lift current barriers for optimal community pharmacy naloxone provision. The objective of this paper is to summarize the literature on community pharmacy-based THN programs, including specific program interventions used to increase naloxone dispensing, naloxone availability and dispensing patterns, facilitators and barriers for the THN programs, and knowledge gaps. Online databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA) and a search of the grey literature were used to identify eligible sources. Sources were screened by two reviewers for eligibility in COVIDENCE software. Both reviewers compared screening results and resolved conflicts through discussion. A data extraction form for all identified full texts was completed by both reviewers and results were compiled through reviewer discussion. Fifty-two sources met the eligibility criteria. The top three barriers identified were: cost/coverage of naloxone, stigma, and education/training for pharmacists. THN program interventions included screening tools, checklists, pocket cards, patient brochures, and utilizing the pharmacy management system to flag eligible patients. Patient knowledge gaps included naloxone misinformation and lack of awareness, while pharmacists demonstrated administrative, clinical, and counselling knowledge gaps. Naloxone availability was found to be highly variable, where independent and rural pharmacies were less likely to stock or dispense naloxone. Further, pharmacies located in districts with higher rates of opioid overdose deaths and lower household income were also less likely to have naloxone available. This review identified multiple new programs, showcasing that the implementation and evaluation of THN programs are an expanding area of research. Future research should focus on implementing and evaluating a THN program through a randomized controlled trial design that incorporates solutions for the barriers and knowledge gaps identified in this study.
