U.S. student pharmacist perceptions of the pharmacist's role in methadone for opioid use disorder: A qualitative study

Are pharmacists on the front lines of the opioid epidemic? A cross-sectional study of the practices and competencies of community and hospital pharmacists in Punjab, Pakistan

INTRODUCTION

Countries are grappling with a rapidly worsening upsurge in the opioid-related overdose deaths, misuse and abuse. There is a dearth of data in Pakistan regarding the practices and competencies of pharmacists in handling opioid-related issues.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional study, conducted across Punjab, Pakistan.

METHOD

The study deployed a validated survey to evaluate the competencies and practices of the community and hospital pharmacists.

RESULTS

504 community pharmacists and 279 hospital pharmacists participated in the survey with an overall response rate of 85.5%. Almost half of the respondents 'never' or 'sometimes' made clinical notes in a journal or dispensing software to monitor ongoing opioid use. Generally, pharmacists were reluctant to collaborate with physicians or notify police regarding the abuse/misuse of opioids. Hospital pharmacists achieved significantly higher mean competency scores than chain and independent community pharmacists (p<0.05). In competency evaluation, three priority areas emerged that require additional training, that is, 'opioid overdose management', 'opioid use monitoring' and 'therapeutic uses of opioids'.

CONCLUSION

Both community and hospital pharmacists hold significant positions and potential to contribute meaningfully to the mitigation of harms and risks associated with opioids. Nevertheless, this study underscores notable deficiencies in the competence of pharmacists, whether in hospital or community settings in Punjab, concerning various aspects related to the dispensing and utilisation of opioids. It also highlights the pressing need for the development of strategies aimed at improving several practice areas including the documentation, the quality of patient counselling, the effectiveness of reporting mechanisms for opioid abuse and the stringent enforcement of regulatory policies to curtail opioid misuse. Thus, to mitigate the opioid epidemic in Pakistan, it is imperative to institute opioid stewardship initiatives aimed at rectifying the competency and procedural deficiencies within the pharmacist workforce.

Demographic and socioeconomic correlates to buprenorphine access in pharmacies

BACKGROUND

Research has focused on buprenorphine prescribing with limited attention to the role of pharmacy access to buprenorphine for opioid use disorder.

OBJECTIVE

This study examines demographic and socioeconomic correlates to buprenorphine access in Georgia pharmacies.

METHODS

A 5-question (12 potential subqueries) telephone administered survey was used to investigate access and stocking patterns of specific dosages and formulations of buprenorphine in Georgia pharmacies (n = 119). Descriptive statistics characterized physician and pharmacy demographics and buprenorphine stocking practices. Correlations between various factors including buprenorphine stocking practices, geographic, and sociodemographic characteristics were identified using nonlinear regression models.

RESULTS

The majority of pharmacies stocked the most commonly prescribed 8/2 mg dosage strength of buprenorphine/naloxone films and tablets (69.0% and 63.0%, respectively). Other strengths were less likely to be readily available. Pharmacies in Suburban Census tracts were 77.0% more likely to stock any type of buprenorphine monotherapy [odds ratio (OR) = 1.77, t = 2.37, P < 0.05] and 58.1% more likely to stock the 8 mg buprenorphine monotherapy formulation [OR = 1.58, t = 2.15, P < 0.05] than Urban tracts. Pharmacies in areas with above-average non-White populations were 29.6% more likely to stock a monotherapy product [OR = 1.30, t = 2.16, P < 0.05], and those in areas with above-average poverty rates were more likely to stock the 8 mg/2 mg buprenorphine/naloxone tablets [OR = 1.04, t = 2.02, P < 0.05]. There were no additional differences across the sample in formulation or dosage strengths. Pharmacists who endorsed challenges dispensing buprenorphine (23.3%) cited issues around insurance coverage, payment difficulty, prior authorization issues, and low stock of specific formulations.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that low availability of certain dosages or formulations of buprenorphine in local pharmacies could obstruct access for patients. Future research should address barriers to supplying buprenorphine and collaborative measures between pharmacists and prescribers to improve access.

Treatment provider perceptions of take-home methadone regulation before and during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The loosening of U.S. methadone regulations during the COVID-19 pandemic expanded calls for methadone reform. This study examines professional perceptions of methadone take-home dose regulation before and during the COVID-19 pandemic to understand responses to varied methadone distribution policies.

METHODS

Fifty-nine substance use disorder treatment professionals were interviewed between 2017 and 2020 in-person or over video call. An inductive iterative coding process was used to analyze the data. Constructivist grounded theory guided the collection and analysis of in-depth interviews.

RESULTS

Treatment professionals expressed mixed views toward methadone take-home regulations. Participants justified regulation using several arguments: 1) patient care benefitting from supervision, 2) attributing improved patient safety to take-home regulation, 3) fearing liability for methadone-related harms, and 4) relying on buprenorphine as an "escape hatch" for patients who cannot manage MMT policies. Other professionals suggested partial deregulation, while others strongly opposed pre-pandemic take-home regulation, explaining such regulations impede medication access and hinder patient-centered care. Some professionals supported the COVID-19 policy changes and saw these as a test run for broader deregulation, while others framed the changes as temporary and cautiously applied deregulation to their services, at times revoking looser rules for patients they perceived as nonadherent.

CONCLUSION

Treatment professionals working in a range of modalities, including opioid treatment programs, expressed hesitation toward expanded take-home methadone access. While some participants also supported forms of deregulation, post-pandemic efforts to extend looser methadone distribution policies will have to address apprehensive professionals if such policy changes are to be meaningfully adopted in community services.