On-time denosumab dosing recovered rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet remains suboptimal.

Timely administration of denosumab every 6 mo is critical in osteoporosis treatment to avoid multiple vertebral fracture risk upon denosumab discontinuation or delay. This study aimed to estimate the immediate and prolonged impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the timing of denosumab doses. We identified older adults (≥66 yr) residing in the community who were due to receive denosumab between January 2016 and December 2020 using Ontario Drug Benefit data. We completed an interrupted time-series analysis to estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) on the monthly proportion of on-time denosumab doses (183 +/-30 d). Analyses were stratified by user type: patients due for their second dose (novice users), third or fourth dose (intermediate users), or ≥5th dose (established users). In additional analyses, we considered patients living in nursing homes, switching to other osteoporosis drugs, and reported trends until February 2022. We studied 148 554 patients (90.9% female, mean [SD] age 79.6 [8.0] yr) receiving 648 221 denosumab doses. The average pre-pandemic proportion of on-time therapy was steady in the community, yet differed by user type: 64.9% novice users, 72.3% intermediate users, and 78.0% established users. We identified an immediate overall decline in the proportion of on-time doses across all user types at the start of the pandemic: -17.8% (95% CI, -19.6, -16.0). In nursing homes, the pre-pandemic proportion of on-time therapy was similar across user types (average 83.5%), with a small decline at the start of the pandemic: -3.2% (95% CI, -5.0, -1.2). On-time therapy returned to pre-pandemic levels by October 2020 and was not impacted by therapy switching. Although on-time dosing remains stable as of February 2022, approximately one-fourth of patients in the community do not receive denosumab on-time. In conclusion, although pandemic disruptions to denosumab dosing were temporary, levels of on-time therapy remain suboptimal.

Alpha-1 adrenergic antagonists and the risk of hospitalization or death in non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Alpha-1 receptor antagonists may interfere with IL-6 signaling and could therefore be a potential treatment for COVID-19. However, the effectiveness of these drugs in mitigating the risk of clinical deterioration among non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to examine the association between alpha-1 antagonist exposure and the 30-day risk of a hospital encounter or death in nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of Ontario residents aged 35 years and older who were eligible for public drug coverage and who had a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 between January 1, 2020, and March 1, 2021. We matched each individual receiving an alpha-1 antagonist at the time of their positive test with two non-exposed individuals using propensity scores. Our outcome was a composite of a hospital admission, emergency department visit, or death, 1 to 30 days following the positive test. RESULTS: We matched 3289 alpha-1 antagonist exposed patients to 6189 unexposed patients. Overall, there was no difference in the 30-day risk of the primary outcome among patients exposed to alpha-1 antagonists at the time of their diagnosis relative to unexposed individuals (28.8% vs. 28.0%; OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.11). In a secondary analysis, individuals exposed to alpha-1 antagonists had a lower risk of death in the 30 days following a COVID diagnosis (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.93). CONCLUSION: Alpha-1 antagonists did not mitigate the 30-day risk of clinical deterioration in non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Our findings do not support the general repurposing of alpha-1 antagonists as a treatment for such patients, although there may be subgroups of patients in whom further research is warranted.

Opioid-related deaths between 2019 and 2021 across 9 Canadian provinces and territories.

BACKGROUND: The drug toxicity crisis continues to accelerate across Canada, with rapid increases in opioid-related harms following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to describe trends in the burden of opioid-related deaths across Canada throughout the pandemic, comparing these trends by province or territory, age, and sex. METHODS: We conducted a repeated cross-sectional analysis of accidental opioid-related deaths between Jan. 1, 2019, and Dec. 31, 2021, across 9 Canadian provinces and territories using aggregated national data. Our primary measure was the burden of premature opioid-related death, measured by potential years of life lost. Our secondary measure was the proportion of all deaths attributable to opioids; we used the Cochrane-Armitage test for trend to compare proportions. RESULTS: Between 2019 and 2021, the annual number of opioid-related deaths increased from 3007 to 6222 and years of life lost increased from 126 115 to 256 336 (from 3.5 to 7.0 yr of life lost per 1000 population). In 2021, the highest number of years of life lost was among males (181 525 yr) and people aged 30-39 years (87 045 yr). In 2019, we found that 1.7% of all deaths among those younger than 85 years were related to opioids, rising to 3.2% in 2021. Significant increases in the proportion of deaths related to opioids were observed across all age groups (p < 0.001), representing 29.3% and 29.0% of deaths among people aged 20-29 and 30-39 years in 2021, respectively. INTERPRETATION: Across Canada, the burden of premature opioid-related deaths doubled between 2019 and 2021, representing more than one-quarter of deaths among younger adults. The disproportionate loss of life in this demographic group highlights the critical need for targeted prevention efforts.

Characteristics of Opioid Toxicity Deaths Among Adolescents and Young Adults in Ontario Prior To and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: To characterize opioid toxicity deaths among adolescents and young adults in Ontario, Canada, prior to and during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive, cross-sectional study of opioid toxicity deaths among individuals aged 15-24 in Ontario in the year prior to (March 17, 2019, to March 16, 2020) and the first year of the pandemic (March 17, 2020, to March 16, 2021) using administrative health databases. We analyzed circumstances surrounding death, substances contributing to death, and health-care encounters prior to death. RESULTS: We identified 284 deaths among Ontarians aged 15-24, including 115 in the year preceding and 169 in the first year of the pandemic. Fentanyl contributed to 84.3% of deaths in the prepandemic year, rising to 93.5% (p = .012) the following year. Stimulants contributed to approximately half of deaths in both periods (41.7% prepandemic and 49.1% during pandemic). In both periods, roughly one in 4 decedents had a health-care encounter in the week prior to death and less than 20% of those with an opioid use disorder received opioid agonist treatment in the 30 days prior to death. DISCUSSION: Among young Ontarians, the number of opioid-related deaths increased by 47% in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Fentanyl contributed to the vast majority of deaths, with non-opioid substances (primarily stimulants) also contributing to approximately half of deaths. Patterns of health-care utilization prior to death suggest opportunities to better connect this population to services that address opioid use disorder needs and promote harm reduction.

A population-based time-series analysis of opioid agonist treatment dispensed during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Identifying effective opioid treatment options during pregnancy is a high priority due to the growing prevalence of opioid use disorder across North America. We assessed the temporal impact of three population-level interventions on the use of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) during pregnancy in Ontario, Canada. DESIGN: This was a population-based time-series analysis to identify trends in the monthly prevalence of pregnant people dispensed methadone and buprenorphine. The impact of adding buprenorphine/naloxone to the public drug formulary, the release of pregnancy-specific guidance and the start of the COVID-19 pandemic were assessed. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study was conducted in Ontario, Canada between 1 July 2013 and 31 March 2022, comprising people who delivered a live or stillbirth in any Ontario hospital during the study period. MEASUREMENTS: We identified any prescription for methadone or buprenorphine dispensed between the estimated conception date and delivery date and calculated the monthly prevalence of OAT-exposed pregnancies among all pregnant people in Ontario. FINDINGS: Overall, rates of OAT during pregnancy have declined since mid-2018. Methadone-exposed pregnancies decreased from 0.46% of all pregnancies in Ontario in 2015 to a low of 0.16% in 2022. In the primary analysis, none of the interventions had a statistically significant impact on overall OAT rates; however, in the stratified analyses, there was a small increase in buprenorphine after the formulary change [0.006%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.0032-0.0081, P < 0.0001] and a decrease in buprenorphine after the release of the 2017 guidelines (-0.005%, 95% CI = -0.0080 to -0.0020, P = 0.001) and the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (-0.003%, 95% CI = -0.0054 to -0.0006, P = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Despite changes in guidance and funding, opioid agonist treatment during pregnancy has been declining in Ontario, Canada since 2018.

Trends in opioid toxicities among people with and without opioid use disorder and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada: A population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Across Canada, the COVID-19 pandemic occurred amidst an ongoing drug toxicity crisis. Although elevated rates of substance-related harms have been observed nationally, it remains unknown if the pandemic state of emergency led to disproportionate increases in opioid toxicities among people with opioid use disorder (OUD) compared to those without. METHODS: We conducted a population-based repeated cross-sectional time series analysis of fatal and non-fatal opioid toxicities between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2021, in Ontario, Canada. We used interventional autoregressive integrated moving average models to examine the impact of the pandemic on monthly rates of opioid toxicities per 100,000 Ontario residents stratified by people with and without OUD. RESULTS: We identified 80,296 opioid toxicities of which 53.5 % occurred among people with OUD. Among 52,052 unique individuals, 60.5 % were male and 46.2 % were 25-44 years old. Between January 2014 and December 2021, the rate of opioid toxicities increased from 2.6 to 10.5 per 100,000 (rate ratio [RR]=4.07). The magnitude of this increase differed among people with OUD (0.8 to 7.4 per 100,000; RR=9.35) and without OUD (1.8 to 3.1 per 100,000; RR=1.74). We observed a significant ramp increase in the overall rate of opioid toxicities following the declaration of the pandemic emergency in March 2020 (+0.19 per 100,000 monthly, 95 % CI: 0.029, 0.36, p = 0.021). In a stratified analysis, we found a similar ramp increase among people with OUD (+0.19 per 100,000 monthly, 95 % CI: 0.10, 0.28, p < 0.001); however, this was not observed among people without OUD (p = 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of opioid toxicities accelerated across Ontario following the pandemic-related state of emergency, with the majority of this increase among people with OUD. The important differences observed among people with OUD compared with those without, highlights the critical need for improved access to harm reduction and treatment interventions among this population.

Validation of case-ascertainment algorithms using health administrative data to identify people who inject drugs in Ontario, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Health administrative data can be used to improve the health of people who inject drugs by informing public health surveillance and program planning, monitoring, and evaluation. However, methodological gaps in the use of these data persist due to challenges in accurately identifying injection drug use at the population level. In this study, we validated case-ascertainment algorithms for identifying people who inject drugs using health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Data from cohorts of people with recent (past 12 month) injection drug use, including those participating in community-based research studies or seeking drug treatment were linked to health administrative data in Ontario from 1992-2020. We assessed the validity of algorithms to identify injection drug use over varying lookback periods (i.e., all years of data [1992 onwards] or within the past 1-5 years), including inpatient and outpatient physician billing claims for drug use, emergency department visits or hospitalizations for drug use or injection-related infections, and opioid agonist treatment (OAT). RESULTS: Algorithms were validated using data from 15,241 people with recent IDU (918 in community cohorts, 14,323 seeking drug treatment). An algorithm consisting of ≥1 physician visit, emergency department visit or hospitalization for drug use, or OAT record could effectively identify IDU history (91.6% sensitivity, 94.2% specificity) and recent IDU (using 3 years lookback: 80.4% sensitivity, 99% specificity) among community cohorts. Algorithms were generally more sensitive among people who inject drugs seeking drug treatment. CONCLUSION: Validated algorithms using health administrative data performed well in identifying people who inject drugs. Despite high sensitivity and specificity, the positive predictive value of these algorithms will vary depending on the underlying prevalence of injection drug use in the population in which they are applied.

Prescribed safer opioid supply: A scoping review of the evidence.

BACKGROUND: Safer opioid supply programs provide prescription pharmaceutical opioids, often with supportive services, to people at high risk of experiencing harms related to substance use. However, questions regarding the effectiveness and safety of this practice remain. We conducted a scoping review of literature describing client outcomes from formal opioid supply programs providing prescriptions for pharmaceutical opioids, and the perceptions of involved clients/providers. METHODS: We performed a scoping review of peer-reviewed studies and grey literature published between January 1, 2012, to September 12, 2023. We included articles reporting either safer opioid supply client outcomes or clients/providers perspectives. Extracted data included study objectives, substance use patterns, client outcomes, client/provider perspectives, and estimates of effectiveness and/or harm. RESULTS: Our search yielded 1,597 articles. Following removal of duplicates and application of exclusion criteria, 24 publications comprising 17 peer-reviewed and seven grey literature publications were included in our study. We generated eight themes summarizing topics in the available literature: opioid-related toxicities, infectious complications, other clinical outcomes, client-reported outcomes, program access barriers, diversion, program retention, and costs to the healthcare system. Specific findings included low rates of opioid toxicities, improved physical and mental health, and improved quality of life among clients. A lack of access to adequate opioid doses and the limited range of opioid options offered within safer opioid supply programs was described by clients and providers as a potential reason for diversion and a barrier to program access. CONCLUSIONS: Generally, evidence suggests that safer opioid supply programs are beneficial to clients through measurable outcomes. However, the available literature has important limitations, including limited inferences about the effectiveness, safety, and potential for diversion within safer opioid supply programs. Further research is needed to support the ongoing evaluation of safer opioid supply programs as one component of a multifactorial response to escalating rates of substance-related harms.

Patterns of publicly funded naltrexone use among patients diagnosed with alcohol use disorder in Ontario.

AIMS: Naltrexone is recommended first-line to manage alcohol use disorder (AUD). With previous studies indicating poor retention on naltrexone, we determined duration of naltrexone use and assessed the association between prescription setting and time to discontinuation in Ontario. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study among Ontario public drug beneficiaries diagnosed with AUD who initiated publicly funded naltrexone from June 2018 to September 2019. The primary outcome was time to naltrexone discontinuation, with a secondary analysis assessing receipt of at least one prescription refill. We used Cox proportional hazards models and logistic regression to test the association between prescription setting and each medication persistence outcome. RESULTS: Among 2531 new naltrexone patients with AUD, the median duration of naltrexone use was 31 days and 394 (15.6%) continued naltrexone for 6 months or longer. There was no association between setting of initiation and duration of naltrexone use; however, those initiating naltrexone following an acute inpatient hospital stay were more likely to fill a second prescription (aOR 1.43, 95% CI 0.96-2.14), while those initiating after an ED visit were less likely to be dispensed a second prescription (aOR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.90) compared to those starting in a physician's office. CONCLUSION: Persistence on naltrexone to treat an AUD is low, regardless of the setting of initiation. Further research is needed to elucidate the barriers encountered by patients with AUD that lead to poor treatment persistence in order to develop interventions that facilitate patient-centered access to evidence-based treatment for AUD in the province.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on prescription stimulant use among children and youth: a population-based study.

COVID-19 associated public health measures and school closures exacerbated symptoms in some children and youth with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Less well understood is how the pandemic influenced patterns of prescription stimulant use. We conducted a population-based study of stimulant dispensing to children and youth ≤ 24 years old between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2022. We used structural break analyses to identify the pandemic month(s) when changes in the dispensing of stimulants occurred. We used interrupted time series models to quantify changes in dispensing following the structural break and compare observed and expected stimulant use. Our main outcome was the change in the monthly rate of stimulant use per 100,000 children and youth. Following an initial immediate decline of 60.1 individuals per 100,000 (95% confidence interval [CI] - 99.0 to - 21.2), the monthly rate of stimulant dispensing increased by 11.8 individuals per 100,000 (95% CI 10.0-13.6), with the greatest increases in trend observed among females, individuals in the highest income neighbourhoods, and those aged 20 to 24. Observed rates were between 3.9% (95% CI 1.7-6.2%) and 36.9% (95% CI 34.3-39.5%) higher than predicted among females from June 2020 onward and between 7.1% (95% CI 4.2-10.0%) and 50.7% (95% CI 47.0-54.4%) higher than expected among individuals aged 20-24 from May 2020 onward. Additional research is needed to ascertain the appropriateness of stimulant use and to develop strategies supporting children and youth with ADHD during future periods of long-term stressors.

Opioid-related overdose deaths among people experiencing homelessness, 2017 to 2021: A population-based analysis using coroner and health administrative data from Ontario, Canada.

AIMS: To measure the change in proportion of opioid-related overdose deaths attributed to people experiencing homelessness and to compare the opioid-related fatalities between individuals experiencing homelessness and not experiencing homelessness at time of death. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Population-based, time-trend analysis using coroner and health administrative databases from Ontario, Canada from 1 July 2017 and 30 June 2021. MEASUREMENTS: Quarterly proportion of opioid-related overdose deaths attributed to people experiencing homelessness. We also obtained socio-demographic and health characteristics of decedents, health-care encounters preceding death, substances directly contributing to death and circumstances surrounding deaths. FINDINGS: A total of 6644 individuals (median age = 40 years, interquartile range = 31-51; 74.1% male) experienced an accidental opioid-related overdose death, among whom 884 (13.3%) were identified as experiencing homelessness at the time of death. The quarterly proportion of opioid-related overdose deaths attributed to people experiencing homelessness increased from 7.2% (26/359) in July-September 2017 to 16.8% (97/578) by April-June 2021 (trend test P < 0.01). Compared with housed decedents, those experiencing homelessness were younger (61.3 versus 53.1% aged 25-44), had higher prevalence of mental health or substance use disorders (77.1 versus 67.1%) and more often visited hospitals (32.1 versus 24.5%) and emergency departments (82.6 versus 68.5%) in the year prior to death. Fentanyl and its analogues more often directly contributed to death among people experiencing homelessness (94.0 versus 81.4%), as did stimulants (67.4 versus 51.6%); in contrast, methadone was less often present (7.8 versus 12.4%). Individuals experiencing homelessness were more often in the presence of a bystander during the acute toxicity event that led to death (55.8 versus 49.7%); and where another individual was present, more often had a resuscitation attempted (61.7 versus 55.1%) or naloxone administered (41.2 versus 28.9%). CONCLUSIONS: People experiencing homelessness account for an increasing proportion of fatal opioid-related overdoses in Ontario, Canada, reaching nearly one in six such deaths in 2021.

The Impact of Blood Glucose Test Strips Reimbursement Limits on Utilization, Costs, and Health-care Utilization in British Columbia.

OBJECTIVE: People living with diabetes and not using insulin may not derive clinically significant benefit from routine glucose self-monitoring. As a result, in 2015, British Columbia (BC) introduced quantity restrictions for blood glucose test strips (BGTS) coverage in public plans. We studied the impact of this policy on utilization, costs, and health-care utilization. METHODS: We identified a cohort of adults (≥18 years old) with diabetes between 2013 and 2019. Using BC's administrative data, we studied utilization and costs among individuals with at least one PharmaCare-eligible BGTS claim. Using interrupted time-series analysis, we studied cost savings and determined the level of policy adherence. In addition, we investigated longitudinal changes in all-cause and diabetes-specific physician visits, all-cause hospitalizations, and health-care spending in the 3 to 5 years after policy implementation. RESULTS: Over the study period, 279.7 million BGTS were eligible for PharmaCare coverage, on which the government spent $124.3 million. After policy implementation, we observed an immediate decline in average utilization and PharmaCare expenditure on BGTS, leading to an estimated $44.6 million in savings between 2015 and 2019 (95% confidence interval $16.9 to $72.3 million). We found no association between the policy's implementation and health services utilization or overall health-care spending over the long term. CONCLUSIONS: Restricting reimbursement for BGTS in BC resulted in significant cost savings without any attendant increase in health services utilization over the subsequent 5 years. This disinvestment freed up resources that could be channeled toward other interventions.

Characteristics, treatment patterns and retention with extended-release subcutaneous buprenorphine for opioid use disorder: A population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Uptake and retention for opioid agonist treatment (OAT) remains low. Novel extended-release formulations may improve OAT accessibility by reducing the frequency of healthcare visits. Our aim was to examine uptake, characteristics, treatment patterns and retention of individuals initiating extended-release subcutaneous buprenorphine (BUP-ER), a monthly injectable OAT. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study among adults aged 18+ initiated on BUP-ER between February 3, 2020 and March 31, 2022 in Ontario, Canada. Using administrative health data, we defined continuous BUP-ER use based on repeat injections within a 56-day period and used Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate time on treatment. Among new BUP-ER recipients, we described individual and prescriber characteristics, healthcare utilization and treatment patterns. RESULTS: 2366 individuals initiated BUP-ER. The median time to BUP-ER discontinuation was 183 days (interquartile range: 66-428 days) and 52.0% of individuals were co-prescribed buprenorphine/naloxone at least once throughout the period of BUP-ER receipt. Among individuals who initiated on a dose of 300mg BUP-ER and had three or more injections, 18.8% continued to receive only 300mg doses (N=276 of 1470). Furthermore, 28.6% of those whose dose was reduced to 100mg (N=341 of 1194) had a subsequent dose increase to 300mg. CONCLUSIONS: On average, people initiating BUP-ER discontinue within the first 6 months of treatment. While BUP-ER is likely providing an important OAT option, the high occurrence of discontinuation, supplementation with buprenorphine/naloxone, and frequent dose increases suggest inadequacy of current dosing recommendations among a proportion of individuals.

Initiations of safer supply hydromorphone increased during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario: An interrupted time series analysis.

AIMS: Calls to prescribe safer supply hydromorphone (SSHM) as an alternative to the toxic drug supply increased during the COVID-19 pandemic but it is unknown whether prescribing behaviour was altered. We aimed to evaluate how the number of new SSHM dispensations changed during the pandemic in Ontario. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective interrupted time-series analysis using provincial administrative databases. We counted new SSHM dispensations in successive 28-day periods from March 22, 2016 to August 30, 2021. We used segmented Poisson regression methods to test for both a change in level and trend of new dispensations before and after March 17, 2020, the date Ontario's pandemic-related emergency was declared. We adjusted the models to account for seasonality and assessed for over-dispersion and residual autocorrelation. We used counterfactual analysis methods to estimate the number of new dispensations attributable to the pandemic. RESULTS: We identified 1489 new SSHM dispensations during the study period (434 [mean of 8 per 28-day period] before and 1055 [mean of 56 per 28-day period] during the pandemic). Median age of individuals initiating SSHM was 40 (interquartile interval 33-48) with 61.7% (N = 919) male sex. Before the pandemic, there was a small trend of increased prescribing (incidence rate ratio [IRR] per period 1.002; 95% confidence interval [95CI] 1.001-1.002; p<0.001), with a change in level (immediate increase) at the pandemic date (relative increase in IRR 1.674; 95CI 1.206-2.322; p = 0.002). The trend during the pandemic was not statistically significant (relative increase in IRR 1.000; 95CI 1.000-1.001; p = 0.251). We estimated 511 (95CI 327-695) new dispensations would not have occurred without the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The pandemic led to an abrupt increase in SSHM prescribing in Ontario, although the rate of increase was similar before and during the pandemic. The absolute number of individuals who accessed SSHM remained low throughout the pandemic.

Initiation of opioid agonist therapy after hospital visits for opioid poisonings in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Emergency department visits and hospital admissions for opioid toxicity are opportunities to initiate opioid agonist therapy (OAT), which reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). The study objectives were to evaluate OAT initiation rates after a hospital encounter for opioid toxicity in Ontario, Canada, and determine whether publication of a 2018 Canadian OUD management guideline was associated with increased initiation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based serial cross-sectional study of hospital encounters for opioid toxicity among patients with OUD between Jan. 1, 2013, and Mar. 31, 2020, in Ontario, Canada. The primary outcome was OAT initiation (methadone, buprenorphine-naloxone, or slow-release oral morphine) within 7 days of discharge, measured quarterly. We examined the impact of the release of the OUD management guideline on OAT initiation rates using Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average models. RESULTS: Among 20 702 hospital visits for opioid toxicity among patients with OUD, the median age was 35 years, and 65.1% were male. Over the study period, the percentage of visits leading to OAT initiation within 7 days rose from 1.7% or less (Q1 2013) to 5.6% (Q1 2020); however, the publication of the Canadian OUD management guideline was not associated with a significant increase in these rates (0.14% slope change, 95% confidence interval -0.11% to 0.38%; p = 0.3). INTERPRETATION: Among hospital encounters for opioid toxicity, despite rising prevalence over time, only 1 in 18 patients were dispensed OAT within a week of discharge in early 2020. These findings highlight missed opportunities to initiate therapies proven to reduce mortality in patients with OUD.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antidepressant and antipsychotic use among children and adolescents: a population-based study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increases in the prevalence of depression, anxiety and behavioural problems among children and youth. Less well understood is the influence of the pandemic on antidepressant and antipsychotic use among children. This is important, as it is possible that antidepressants and antipsychotics were used as a "stop-gap" measure to treat mental health symptoms when in-person access to outpatient care and school-based supportive services was disrupted. Furthermore, antipsychotics and antidepressants have been associated with harm in children and youth. We examined trends in dispensing of these medications two years following the pandemic among children 18 years of age and under in Ontario, Canada. Methods: We conducted a population-based time-series study of antidepressant and antipsychotic medication dispensing to children and adolescents ≤18 years old between September 1, 2014, and March 31, 2022. We measured monthly population-adjusted rates of antidepressant and antipsychotics obtained from the IQVIA Geographic Prescription Monitor (GPM) database. We used structural break analyses to identify the pandemic month(s) when changes in the dispensing of antidepressants and antipsychotics occurred. We used interrupted time series models to quantify changes in dispensing following the structural break and compare observed and expected use of these drugs. Results: Overall, we found higher-than-expected dispensing of antidepressants and antipsychotics in children and youth. Specifically, we observed an immediate step decrease in antidepressant dispensing associated with a structural break in April 2020 (-55.8 units per 1,000 individuals; 95% confidence intervals [CI] CI: -117.4 to 5.8), followed by an increased monthly trend in the rate of antidepressant dispensing of 13.0 units per 1,000 individuals (95% CI: 10.2-15.9). Antidepressant dispensing was consistently greater than predicted from September 2020 onward. Antipsychotic dispensing increased immediately following a June 2020 structural break (26.4 units per 1,000 individuals; 95% CI: 15.8-36.9) and did not change appreciably thereafter. Antipsychotic dispensing was higher than predicted at all time points from June 2020 onward. Conclusion: We found higher-than-expected dispensing of antidepressants and antipsychotics in children and youth. These increases were sustained through nearly two years of observation and are especially concerning in light of the potential for harm with the long-term use of antipsychotics in children. Further research is required to understand the clinical implications of these findings.

Experiences and Outcomes of Using e-Prescribing for Opioids: Rapid Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: e-Prescribing is designed to assist in facilitating safe and appropriate prescriptions for patients. Currently, it is unknown to what extent e-prescribing for opioids influences experiences and outcomes. To address this gap, a rapid scoping review was conducted. OBJECTIVE: This rapid scoping review aims to (1) explore how e-prescribing has been used clinically; (2) examine the effects of e-prescribing on clinical outcomes, the patient or clinician experience, service delivery, and policy; and (3) identify current gaps in the present literature to inform future studies and recommendations. METHODS: A rapid scoping review was conducted following the guidance of the JBI 2020 scoping review methodology and the World Health Organization guide to rapid reviews. A comprehensive literature search was completed by an expert librarian from inception until November 16, 2022. Three databases were electronically searched: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Scopus (Elsevier). The search criteria were as follows: (1) e-prescribing programs targeted to the use or misuse of opioids, including those that were complemented or accompanied by clinically focused initiatives, and (2) a primary research study of experimental, quasi-experimental, observational, qualitative, or mixed methods design. An additional criterion of an ambulatory component of e-prescribing (eg, e-prescribing occurred upon discharge from acute care) was added at the full-text stage. No language limitations or filters were applied. All articles were double screened by trained reviewers. Gray literature was manually searched by a single reviewer. Data were synthesized using a descriptive approach. RESULTS: Upon completing screening, 34 articles met the inclusion criteria: 32 (94%) peer-reviewed studies and 2 (6%) gray literature documents (1 thesis study and 1 report). All 33 studies had a quantitative component, with most highlighting e-prescribing from acute care settings to community settings (n=12, 36%). Only 1 (3%) of the 34 articles provided evidence on e-prescribing in a primary care setting. Minimal prescriber, pharmacist, and clinical population characteristics were reported. The main outcomes identified were related to opioid prescribing rates, alerts (eg, adverse drug events and drug-drug interactions), the quantity and duration of opioid prescriptions, the adoption of e-prescribing technology, attitudes toward e-prescribing, and potential challenges with the implementation of e-prescribing into clinical practice. e-Prescribing, including key features such as alerts and dose order sets, may reduce prescribing errors. CONCLUSIONS: This rapid scoping review highlights initial promising results with e-prescribing and opioid therapy management. It is important that future work explores the experience of prescribers, pharmacists, and patients using e-prescribing for opioid therapy management with an emphasis on prescribers in the community and primary care. Developing a common set of quality indicators for e-prescribing of opioids will help build a stronger evidence base. Understanding implementation considerations will be of importance as the technology is integrated into clinical practice and health systems.

Neonatal outcomes of pregnant women attending integrated and standard substance use treatment programs in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Substance use in pregnancy raises concern given its potential teratogenic effects. Given the unique needs of parenting people and the potential impact for developing children, specialized substance use treatment programs are increasingly being implemented for this population. Substance use treatment is associated with more positive neonatal outcomes compared with no treatment, however treatment models vary limiting our understanding of key treatment components/modelsFew studies have explored the influence of treatment model type (i.e., integrated treatments designed for pregnant clients compared with standard treatment models) and no studies have examined the influence of treatment model on neonatal outcomes using Canadian data. METHOD: We conducted a population-based cohort study of clients who were pregnant when initiating integrated (n = 564) and standard (n = 320) substance use treatment programs in Ontario, Canada. RESULTS: Neonatal outcomes did not significantly differ by treatment type (integrated or standard), with rates of adverse neonatal outcomes higher than published rates for the general population, despite receipt of adequate levels of prenatal care. While this suggests no significant impact of treatment, it is notable that as a group, clients engaged in integrated treatment presented with more risk factors for adverse neonatal outcomes than those in standard treatment. While we controlled for these risks in our analyses, this may have obscured their influence in relation to treatment type. CONCLUSION: Findings underscore the need for more nuanced research that considers the influence of client factors in interaction with treatment type. Pregnant clients engaged in any form of substance use treatment are at higher risk of having children who experience adverse neonatal outcomes. This underscores the urgent need for further investment in services and research to support maternal and neonatal health before and during pregnancy, as well as long-term service models that support women and children beyond the perinatal and early childhood periods.

Interventional pain blocks in Ontario: a population-based cross-sectional study on 2019 procedural volumes, clustering, and physician billings.

PURPOSE: Multidisciplinary chronic pain management includes pharmacologic, psychological, and interventional strategies. In Canada, the use of interventional pain blocks (PBs) has increased in recent years. We sought to determine the distribution and clustering of PBs among physicians in Ontario, and to examine differences in the patient and physician characteristics by volume of PBs administered. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cross-sectional study of PBs administered for chronic pain to Ontario residents between 1 January and 31 December 2019. Our primary outcome was the total number of PBs administered in an outpatient setting for chronic pain by eligible physicians. We used Lorenz curves, overall and stratified by PB type and physician specialty, to examine clustering of PBs among physicians, and compared patient and physician characteristics using standardized differences. RESULTS: Among physicians who provided PBs, provision was highly clustered, with the top 1% of physicians providing 39% of blocks. In these high-volume PB providers, the majority of whom were general practitioners (88.4%), PBs made up the vast majority (median [interquartile range (IQR)], 87% [84-89]) of their billings, with the majority of the patients in their practices (63.0%) receiving at least one PB in 2019. Patients who received a PB from a high-volume provider had a higher annual frequency of visit for PBs (median [IQR], 10 [3-23]) and number of PBs administered per visit (median [IQR], 5 [4-6]). CONCLUSION: Pain block administration is highly clustered in Ontario, with many patients receiving PBs in ways that are not supported by best evidence. Further research is required to determine whether the Ontario fee-for-service model of billing has created a suboptimal use of these health care resources.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La prise en charge multidisciplinaire de la douleur chronique comprend des stratégies pharmacologiques, psychologiques et interventionnelles. Au Canada, l'utilisation de blocs interventionnels pour la douleur (PB pour 'pain block') a augmenté au cours des dernières années. Nous avons cherché à déterminer la répartition et le regroupement des PB parmi les médecins en Ontario, et à examiner les différences dans les caractéristiques de la patientèle et des médecins selon le volume de blocs administrés. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude transversale basée sur la population des PB administrés pour traiter la douleur chronique aux personnes résidant en Ontario entre le 1er janvier et le 31 décembre 2019. Notre critère d'évaluation principal était le nombre total de blocs pour la douleur administrés en ambulatoire pour la douleur chronique par des médecins éligibles. Nous avons utilisé les courbes de Lorenz, globalement et stratifiées par type de blocs pour la douleur et par spécialité médicale, pour examiner le regroupement des PB parmi les médecins, et comparé les caractéristiques de la patientèle et des médecins en utilisant des différences standardisées. RéSULTATS: Parmi les médecins qui réalisaient des PB, l'offre était fortement regroupée, le 1 % supérieur des médecins réalisant 39 % des blocs. Parmi ces médecins réalisant un volume élevé de PB, dont la majorité étaient des médecins généralistes (88,4 %), les PB représentaient la grande majorité ([écart interquartile (ÉIQ)] médian, 87 % [84-89]) de leur facturation, la majorité (63,0 %) des patient·es de leur cabinet recevant au moins un bloc pour la douleur en 2019. Les patient·es qui ont reçu un PB d'un prestataire à volume élevé avaient une fréquence annuelle de visite plus élevée pour les PB (médiane [ÉIQ], 10 [3-23]) et un nombre plus élevé de PB administrés par visite (médiane [ÉIQ], 5 [4-6]). CONCLUSION: L'administration de blocs pour la douleur est fortement concentrée en Ontario, bon nombre de patient·es recevant des PB d'une manière qui n'est pas appuyée par les meilleures données probantes. D'autres recherches sont nécessaires pour déterminer si le modèle de facturation à l'acte de l'Ontario a créé une utilisation sous-optimale de ces ressources en soins de santé.

New Persistent Opioid Use After Childbirth.

OBJECTIVE: To examine factors associated with new persistent opioid use after childbirth. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of individuals who initiated opioid therapy within 7 days of discharge from hospital after delivery between September 1, 2013, and September 30, 2021. The primary outcome was new persistent opioid use , which was defined as one or more prescriptions for an opioid within 90 days of the first postpartum prescription and one or more subsequent opioid prescriptions in the 91-365 days afterward. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess patient-, pregnancy-, and prescription-related factors associated with new persistent opioid use after delivery. RESULTS: We identified 118,694 unique deliveries after which opioids were initiated, including 99,399 cesarean (83.7%) and 19,295 vaginal (16.3%) deliveries. Among mothers who initiated an opioid after delivery, 1,282 (10.8/1,000 deliveries) met our definition of new persistent opioid use in the subsequent year. Rates of new persistent opioid use were appreciably higher after vaginal (16.0/1,000) compared with cesarean (9.8/1,000) deliveries. Each additional 30 morphine milligram equivalents in the initial opioid prescription was associated with an increased risk of new persistent use after cesarean (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.06, 95% CI 1.04-1.08) and vaginal (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.08) delivery. A concomitant benzodiazepine prescription after cesarean delivery was associated with a markedly increased risk of persistent opioid use (aOR 2.69, 95% CI 1.60-4.52). CONCLUSION: Among people who filled an opioid prescription after delivery, about 1% displayed evidence of persistent opioid use in the subsequent year. Initial prescriptions for large quantities of opioids and a concurrent benzodiazepine prescription may be important modifiable risk factors to prevent new persistent opioid use after delivery.