Impact of naloxone education for patients receiving buprenorphine-containing prescriptions indicated for opioid use disorder at an independent community pharmacy

A cross-sectional survey exploring organizational readiness to implement community pharmacy-based opioid counseling and naloxone services in rural versus urban settings in Alabama

Background

Rural US regions experience lower naloxone dispensing rates compared to urban counterparts, particularly in Alabama. In light of this, strategies to enhance opioid counseling and naloxone services (OCN) in rural community pharmacies are critical. However, organizational readiness to implement OCN in rural versus urban contexts where resource networks may differ is not well understood.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to explore organizational readiness and identify factors associated with implementation of OCN in rural versus urban Alabama community pharmacies.

Methods

Alabama community pharmacists and technicians were recruited to participate in an anonymous online cross-sectional survey via email. The survey instrument was adapted from the Organizational Readiness to Change Assessment (ORCA). Primary outcome measures included 3 overarching ORCA domains (Evidence, Context, and Facilitation) with 19 subscales regarding OCN implementation readiness, measured via 5-point Likert-type scales (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Secondarily, pharmacy OCN implementation status (implementer, non-implementer, or in-development) was measured via multiple-choice (1-item). Differences in mean domain and subscale scores between rural and urban pharmacies were evaluated using Mann-Whitney U tests and influential factors affecting OCN implementation status were assessed via logistic regression (alpha = 0.05).

Results

Of 171 respondents, the majority were pharmacists (78.6 %) in urban locations (57.1 %). Mean[SD] clinical experience evidence (Evidence) (3.98[0.69] vs 3.74[0.71]; p = 0.029), staff culture (Context) (4.04[0.66] vs 3.85[0.76]; p = 0.047), service measurement goals (Context) (3.92[0.77] vs 3.66[0.79]; p = 0.034), and senior management characteristics (Facilitation) (3.87[0.72] vs 3.71[0.66]; p = 0.045) subscales were higher in urban versus rural pharmacies. Notably, 66.7 % of pharmacies were current OCN implementers, and pharmacies with higher ORCA context domain scores had 3.230 greater odds of implementing or being in the process of developing OCN (95 % CI = 1.116-9.350; p = 0.031).

Conclusion

Organizational readiness to implement OCN was higher among urban versus rural pharmacies in terms of perceived strength of clinical evidence, staff culture, service measurement goals, and senior management characteristics. Future research may leverage key contextual factors to enhance OCN implementation.

Organizational Readiness to Implement Community Pharmacy-Based Opioid Counseling and Naloxone Services: A Scoping Review of Current Practice Models and Opportunities

The purpose of this study was to explore existing practice models and opportunities surrounding community pharmacist-delivered opioid counseling and naloxone (OCN) services in the U.S., with the goal of enhancing organizational readiness and improving patient access. A scoping literature review was conducted. English-language articles published in peer-reviewed journals from January 2012-July 2022 were sought via PubMed, CINAHL, IPA, and Google Scholar using permutations of terms such as "pharmacist/pharmacy", "opioid/opiate", "naloxone", "counseling", and "implement/implementation". Original articles reporting the resources/inputs (personnel; pharmacist full-time equivalents; facilities and expenses; in-house versus outsourced personnel), implementation processes (legal source of pharmacist authority; patient identification strategies; intervention procedures; workflow strategies; business operations), and programmatic outcomes (uptake and delivery; interventions made; economic impact; patient or provider satisfaction) of pharmacist-delivered OCN services in community (retail) settings were retained. Twelve articles describing ten unique studies were included. The studies primarily used quasi-experimental designs and were published from 2017 to 2021. The articles described seven broad program elements/themes: interprofessional collaboration (n = 2); patient education format including one-on-one patient education (n = 12) and group education sessions (n = 1); non-pharmacist provider education (n = 2); pharmacy staff education (n = 8); opioid misuse screening tools (n = 7); naloxone recommendation/dispensing (n = 12); and opioid therapy and pain management (n = 1). Pharmacists screened/counseled 11-2716 patients and provided 11-430 doses of naloxone. Limited implementation costs, patient/provider satisfaction, or economic impact measures were reported. This review may serve as a guide for community pharmacists in implementing OCN services in their own practices. Future studies should clarify OCN program implementation costs, patient/provider satisfaction, and the economic impact.

Patient, prescriber, and Community factors associated with filled naloxone prescriptions among patients receiving buprenorphine 2017-18

BACKGROUND

Prescribing naloxone to patients at increased opioid overdose risk is a key component of opioid overdose prevention efforts, but little is known about naloxone fills among patients receiving buprenorphine for opioid use disorder, one such high risk group.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study used de-identified pharmacy claims representing 90% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in 50 states and the District of Columbia. We performed a multivariable logistic regression to examine filled naloxone prescriptions among patients receiving buprenorphine treatment and assessed how filled naloxone prescriptions vary by patient, prescriber, and community characteristics.

RESULTS

Filled naloxone prescriptions occurred among 4.5% of buprenorphine treatment episodes. Episodes paid through Medicaid (aOR 2.40, 95%CI 2.33-2.47) and Medicare (aOR 1.53, 95%CI 1.46-1.60) had higher odds of filled naloxone prescriptions than commercial insurance episodes. Compared to episodes where the primary prescriber was an adult primary care physician, odds of filling a naloxone prescription were higher among episodes prescribed by addiction specialists (aOR 1.30, 95% CI 1.24-1.37) and physician assistants/nurse practitioners (aOR 1.57, 95% CI 1.53-1.61).

CONCLUSIONS

Prescribing naloxone to patients receiving buprenorphine represents a tangible clinical action that can be taken to help prevent opioid overdose deaths. However, despite recommendations to co-prescribe naloxone to patients at increased risk for opioid overdose, rates of filling naloxone prescriptions remain low among patients dispensed buprenorphine. States, insurers, and health systems should consider implementing strategies to facilitate increased co-prescribing of naloxone to at-risk individuals.