Knowledge of naloxone and take-home naloxone programs among a sample of people who inject drugs in Australia: Variations across capital cities

"Naloxone? Not for me!" First cross-assessment by patients and healthcare professionals of the risk of opioid overdose

BACKGROUND

Opioid-related mortality is a rising public health concern in France, where opioids were in 2021 implicated in 75% of overdose deaths. Opioid substitution treatment (OST) was implicated in almost half of deaths related to substance and drug abuse. Although naloxone could prevent 80% of these deaths, there are a number of barriers to the distribution of take-home naloxone (THN) among opioid users in France. This study is the first one which compares patients' self-assessment of the risk of future opioid overdose with the hetero-assessment provided by healthcare professionals in a population of individuals eligible for naloxone.

METHODS

This was a multicenter descriptive observational study carried out in pharmacies across the Pays de la Loire region (France) during April and May 2022. All adult patients who visited a participating pharmacy for a prescription of OST and provided oral informed consent were enrolled in the study. Retrospective data were collected through cross-sectional interviews conducted by the pharmacist with the patient, utilizing an ad hoc questionnaire. The patient's self-assessment of overdose risk was evaluated using a Likert scale from 0 to 10. The pharmacist relied on the presence or absence of overdose risk situations defined by the French Health Authority (HAS). The need to hold THN was assessed using a composite criterion.

RESULTS

A total of 34 patients were interviewed; near one third were aware of the existence of THN and a minority had THN in their possession. Out of the 34 participants, 29 assessed their own risk of future opioid overdose: 65.5% reported having zero risk, while 6.9% believed they had a high risk. Nevertheless, at least one risk situation of opioid overdose was identified according to HAS criteria in 73.5% of the participants (n = 25). Consequently, 55% of the participants underestimated their risk of experiencing a future opioid overdose. Yet, dispensing THN has been judged necessary for 88.2% of the participants.

CONCLUSION

This study underscored the imperative need to inform not only healthcare professionals but also the patients and users themselves on the availability of THN and the risk situations of opioid overdose.

"It can save your life, that's all I know," barriers and facilitators for engagement in take-home naloxone for people receiving opioid substitution treatment in regional Australia: An explorative study

Engagement in take-home naloxone (THN) programs by people receiving opioid substitution treatment (OST) in Australia is low despite methadone being a significant contributor to opioid overdose deaths. Our aim was to explore barriers and facilitators for OST patients to engage in THN. We used a descriptive qualitative design with thematic analysis to gain insight into naloxone uptake by people engaged in an OST program in regional Australia. Eleven participants were interviewed; eight had previously engaged with THN. Barriers to THN included limited knowledge and understanding, lack of information, and not personally experiencing an overdose. Facilitators included having a traumatic experience of overdose, knowledge and understanding of THN and overdose, empowerment in carrying naloxone, and expanding THN programs. Support for the expansion of THN programs is desired among participants, and widespread peer distribution is understood to be the key to success. This study found that prior traumatic experience of overdose facilitates acceptance of THN, and being offered THN was the most important factor in engagement. Less clear is how to engage people who lack a traumatic overdose experience.

Does naloxone provision lead to increased substance use? A systematic review to assess if there is evidence of a 'moral hazard' associated with naloxone supply

BACKGROUND

Take home naloxone (THN) programs have been rapidly upscaled in response to increasing opioid-related mortality. One often cited concern is that naloxone provision could be associated with increased opioid use, due to the availability of naloxone to reverse opioid overdose. We conducted a systematic review to determine whether THN provision is associated with changes in substance use by participants enrolled in THN programs.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature to assess changes in heroin or other substance use by people who use opioids following THN provision.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 2578 participants were included. Of the seven studies, there were two quasi-experimental studies and five cohort studies. Based on the Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment, four studies were of moderate quality and three studies were of high quality. Of the five studies that reported on the primary outcome of heroin use, no study found evidence of increased heroin use across the study population. Five studies reported on other substance use (benzodiazepines, alcohol, cocaine, amphetamine, cannabis, prescription opioids), none of which found evidence of an increase in other substance use associated with THN provision. Four studies reported on changes in overdose frequency following THN provision: three studies reporting no change, and one study of people prescribed opioids finding a reduction in opioid-related emergency department attendances for participants who received naloxone.

CONCLUSION

We found no evidence that THN provision was associated with increased opioid use or overdose. Concerns that THN supply may lead to increased substance use were not supported by data from reviewed studies.

Benefits and barriers associated with take-home-naloxone in the view of Italian service providers

Purpose

Spanning almost 30 years, Italy’s experience with take-home-naloxone (THN) provides an interesting case study on the international scene because of its specific history, regulation and trends in overdose (OD) rates. Accordingly, this study aims to contribute to the evidence base for THN and its delivery in a different setting.

Design/methodology/approach

The study focuses on service providers’ perceptions of the benefits, risks and barriers associated with THN provision. Data was collected using a mixed-methods approach as follows: an online structured questionnaire (no. of respondents = 63) and two focus groups (no. of total participants = 18).

Findings

Findings show that service providers believe the benefits of THN far outweigh the risks and accrue to services, as well as users. The study also suggests that the barriers in Italy are mostly ideological and political, and illustrates how resistance to administering THN can re-emerge when ODs are no longer a social emergency. Furthermore, the study found that health and social workers have different attitudes which are also reflected at the level of public and private services, thereby shaping slightly different models of THN supply.

Originality/value

The study suggests that barriers associated to THN are more ideological and political rather than concrete, which explains why, even where it seems long established, can easily re-emerge once ODs are no longer a social emergency.

Opioid-Associated Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: Distinctive Clinical Features and Implications for Health Care and Public Responses: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Opioid overdose is the leading cause of death for Americans 25 to 64 years of age, and opioid use disorder affects >2 million Americans. The epidemiology of opioid-associated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the United States is changing rapidly, with exponential increases in death resulting from synthetic opioids and linear increases in heroin deaths more than offsetting modest reductions in deaths from prescription opioids. The pathophysiology of polysubstance toxidromes involving opioids, asphyxial death, and prolonged hypoxemia leading to global ischemia (cardiac arrest) differs from that of sudden cardiac arrest. People who use opioids may also develop bacteremia, central nervous system vasculitis and leukoencephalopathy, torsades de pointes, pulmonary vasculopathy, and pulmonary edema. Emergency management of opioid poisoning requires recognition by the lay public or emergency dispatchers, prompt emergency response, and effective ventilation coupled to compressions in the setting of opioid-associated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Effective ventilation is challenging to teach, whereas naloxone, an opioid antagonist, can be administered by emergency medical personnel, trained laypeople, and the general public with dispatcher instruction to prevent cardiac arrest. Opioid education and naloxone distributions programs have been developed to teach people who are likely to encounter a person with opioid poisoning how to administer naloxone, deliver high-quality compressions, and perform rescue breathing. Current American Heart Association recommendations call for laypeople and others who cannot reliably establish the presence of a pulse to initiate cardiopulmonary resuscitation in any individual who is unconscious and not breathing normally; if opioid overdose is suspected, naloxone should also be administered. Secondary prevention, including counseling, opioid overdose education with take-home naloxone, and medication for opioid use disorder, is important to prevent recurrent opioid overdose.

Factors associated with withdrawal symptoms and anger among people resuscitated from an opioid overdose by take-home naloxone: Exploratory mixed methods analysis

INTRODUCTION

Take-home naloxone (THN) is a clinically effective and cost-effective means of reducing opioid overdose fatality. Nonetheless, naloxone administration that successfully saves a person's life can still produce undesirable and harmful effects.

AIM

To better understand factors associated with two widely reported adverse outcomes following naloxone administration; namely the person resuscitated displays: i. withdrawal symptoms and ii. anger.

METHODS

A mixed methods study combining a randomized controlled trial of overdose education and naloxone prescribing to people with opioid use disorder and semi-structured qualitative interviews with trial participants who had responded to an overdose whilst in the trial. All data were collected in New York City (2014-2019). A dataset (comprising demographic, pharmacological, situational, interpersonal, and overdose training related variables) was generated by transforming qualitative interview data from 47 overdose events into dichotomous variables and then combining these with quantitative demographic and overdose training related data from the main trial. Associations between variables within the dataset and reports of: i. withdrawal symptoms and ii. anger were explored using chi-squared tests, t-tests, and logistic regressions.

RESULTS

A multivariate logistic regression found that people who had overdosed were significantly more likely to display anger if the person resuscitating them criticized, berated or chastised them during resuscitation (adjusted OR = 27 [95% CI = 4.0-295]). In contrast, they were significantly less likely to display anger if the person resuscitating them communicated positively with them (OR = 0.10 [95% CI = 0.01-0.78]). Both positive and negative communication styles were independently associated with anger, and communication was associated with 59% of the variance in anger. There was no evidence that people who displayed withdrawal symptoms were more likely to display anger than those not displaying withdrawal symptoms, and neither displaying withdrawal symptoms nor displaying anger were associated with using more drugs after resuscitation.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to common assumptions, withdrawal symptoms and anger following naloxone administration may be unrelated phenomena. Findings are consistent with previous research that has suggested that a lay responder's positive or reassuring communication style may lessen anger post overdose. Implications for improving THN programmes and naloxone administration are discussed.

Addiction stigma and the production of impediments to take-home naloxone uptake

Opioid overdose deaths are a major health issue in Australia and around the world. Programmes to provide opioid consumers with 'take-home' naloxone to reverse overdose exist internationally, but uptake by mainstream health services and consumers remains inconsistent. Researchers have identified a range of important educational, training and logistical impediments to take-home naloxone uptake and distribution, yet they have focused less on the social dynamics that can enhance or limit access, such as stigma. In this article, we also explore impediments to uptake, drawing on qualitative interview data gathered for an Australian research project on take-home naloxone. Mobilising a performative approach to stigma, we argue that overdose and prevention are shaped by the social dynamics of stigma and, as such, responsibility for dealing with overdose, as with take-home naloxone, should also be considered social (i.e. shared among peers, the public, communities and governments). Our interview data illuminate the various ways in which addiction stigma limits the possibilities and capacities of take-home naloxone and overdose prevention. First, we focus on how stigma may impede professional information provision about take-home naloxone by limiting the extent to which it is presented as a matter of interest for all opioid consumers, not just those who consume opioids illicitly. Second, we explore how stigma may limit the scale-up and expansion of programmes and access points. From here, we focus on how stigma co-constitutes the politics of overdose and prevention, rendering take-home naloxone ill-suited to many social settings of overdose. In closing, we point out that stigma is not just a post hoc impediment to access to and use of take-home naloxone but is central to opioid overdose production itself, and to effective prevention. While take-home naloxone is an excellent life-saving initiative, uncritically valorising it may divert attention from broader goals, such as the de-stigmatisation of drug consumption through decriminalisation, and other ambitious attempts to reduce overdose.

Access and Barriers to Take-Home Naloxone Use among Emergency Department Patients with Opioid Misuse in Baltimore, Maryland, USA

The opioid epidemic has prompted the expansion of take-home naloxone (THN) distribution programs. The proportion of emergency department (ED) patients with opioid misuse who have access to a naloxone kit (NK) and barriers to using it are unclear. Objective: Characterizing the access and barrier to NK use among at-risk ED patients. Methods: We enrolled a convenience sample of ED patients with active opioid misuse from May 21-July 31, 2018. We administered a survey to collect patients' demographic data, substance use history, and access to and use of NK. The primary outcome was NK access (prior receipt of a kit or prescription); secondary outcomes were knowledge and use of NK, and barriers to obtaining and using it. Results: Of 165 respondents, 71.5% knew of THN programs and 57.6% (n = 95) had access to THN by either having received a NK (n = 90) or a prescription (n = 5); 34 respondents received both. Among 39 (23.6%) who received a naloxone prescription, 25 (64.1%) filled it. 60.0% (n = 99) reported knowing how to administer naloxone; lack of training was the primary reason (n = 63/66, 96.9%) for their unfamiliarity. Patients who presented after an opioid overdose (25.5%; n = 42) were less likely to have knowledge of THN programs (57.1% vs. 76.4%), and to have received a NK (35.7% vs. 61.0%). Conclusion: Awareness of THN programs was high among our cohort. But approximately 60% the respondents received a NK or knew how to use it. Despite efforts to expand THN access, gaps in knowledge, access, and use exist.

Justice involvement patterns, overdose experiences, and naloxone knowledge among men and women in criminal justice diversion addiction treatment

Background

Persons in addiction treatment are likely to experience and/or witness drug overdoses following treatment and thus could benefit from overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs. Diverting individuals from the criminal justice system to addiction treatment represents one treatment engagement pathway, yet OEND needs among these individuals have not been fully described.

Methods

We characterized justice involvement patterns among 514 people who use opioids (PWUO) participating in a criminal justice diversion addiction treatment program during 2014–2016 using a gender-stratified latent class analysis. We described prevalence and correlates of naloxone knowledge using quasi-Poisson regression models with robust standard errors.

Results

Only 56% of participants correctly identified naloxone as an opioid overdose treatment despite that 68% had experienced an overdose and 79% had witnessed another person overdose. We identified two latent justice involvement classes: low involvement (20.3% of men, 46.5% of women), characterized by older age at first arrest, more past-year arrests, and less time incarcerated; and high involvement (79.7% of men, 53.5% of women), characterized by younger age at first arrest and more lifetime arrests and time incarcerated. Justice involvement was not associated with naloxone knowledge. Male participants who had personally overdosed more commonly identified naloxone as an overdose treatment after adjustment for age, race, education level, housing status, heroin use, and injection drug use (prevalence ratio [95% confidence interval]: men 1.5 [1.1–2.0]).

Conclusions

All PWUO in criminal justice diversion programs could benefit from OEND given the high propensity to experience and witness overdoses and low naloxone knowledge across justice involvement backgrounds and genders.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12954-019-0317-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Why aren't Australian pharmacists supplying naloxone? Findings from a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose is a significant public health issue among people who use pharmaceutical opioids and/or heroin. One response to reducing overdose deaths is to expand public access to naloxone. The Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration down-scheduled naloxone from prescription only (S4) to pharmacist only over-the-counter (OTC, schedule 3) in February 2016. There is little research examining pharmacists' perspectives or experiences of this change.

METHODS

Thirty-seven semi-structured interviews with Australian community pharmacists were conducted in 2016-2017 to investigate pharmacists' attitudes to and experiences of OTC naloxone. Transcripts were thematically analysed, guided by a broad interest in facilitators and barriers to OTC supply.

RESULTS

Around half of the pharmacists were aware of the down-scheduling and only two had provided OTC naloxone. Core barriers to pharmacist provision of OTC naloxone included limited understanding of opioid overdose, confusion about the role and responsibilities of pharmacists in providing OTC naloxone, concerns about business, stigma related to people who inject drugs (PWID) and system-level challenges.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacy provision of OTC naloxone offers an important opportunity to reduce overdose mortality. Our study suggests this opportunity is yet to be realised and highlights several individual- and structural-level impediments hindering the expansion of public access to naloxone via community pharmacies. There is a need to develop strategies to improve pharmacists' knowledge of OTC naloxone and opioid overdose as well as to address other logistical and cultural barriers that limit naloxone provision in pharmacy settings. These need to be addressed at the individual level (training) as well as the system level (information, regulation and supply).