Facilitators and Barriers to Naloxone Kit Use Among Opioid-Dependent Patients Enrolled in Medication Assisted Therapy Clinics in North Carolina

Access to, Experience with, and Attitudes towards Take Home Naloxone: An Online Survey

The opioid public health crisis continues to burden individuals, communities, and economies. Public health opinion has emphasized the need for increased access to harm reduction services, but there is a dearth of information on the views and experiences of people who use opioids. Our study aimed to investigate the prevalence of naloxone use, attitudes, and experiences with naloxone among an online community of people who use drugs. We performed a cross-sectional survey looking at experiences with and attitudes towards take-home naloxone. Data is presented descriptively, with analysis of the differences between people who do and do not use opioids using the χ2 and Fisher's exact tests. There were 1,143 respondents, of whom 70% were from the United States. Only 38% of participants who use opioids had received naloxone training, but 56% of these individuals said that they felt comfortable using a naloxone kit. Nearly all respondents (95%) said they would be willing to use naloxone on someone who had overdosed and approximately 90% would want naloxone used on them in case of an overdose. Regarding harm reduction, 24% of respondents said they had access to safe use programs, and 33% said they had access to clean needle exchange programs. A majority of the participants who use opioids were in favor of having naloxone with them when using drugs and believed naloxone should be freely available. This study demonstrates the receptiveness of take-home naloxone and highlights the need for better implementation of naloxone within communities that use opioids.

Motivation to Carry Naloxone: A Qualitative Analysis of Emergency Department Patients

PURPOSE

Our aim was to explore perspectives of patients who received naloxone in the emergency department (ED) about (1) naloxone carrying and use following an ED visit and (2) motivation for performing these behaviors.

DESIGN

Semi-structured interviews of patients prescribed naloxone at ED discharge.

SETTINGS

Three urban academic EDs in Philadelphia, PA.

PARTICIPANTS

25 participants completed the in-depth, semi-structured interviews and demographic surveys. Participants were majority male, African American, and had previously witnessed or experienced an overdose.

METHODS

Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using content analysis. We used a hybrid inductive-deductive approach that included prespecified and emergent themes.

RESULTS

We found that naloxone carrying behavior was variable and influenced by four main motivators: (1) naloxone access; (2) personal experience and salience of naloxone, (3) comfort with naloxone administration, and (4) societal influences on naloxone carrying. In particular, those with personal history of overdose or close friends or family at risk were motivated to carry naloxone.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants in this study reported several important motivators for naloxone carrying after an ED visit, including ease of naloxone access and comfort, perceived risk of experiencing or encountering an overdose, and social influences on naloxone carrying behaviors. EDs, health systems, and public health officials should consider these factors influencing motivation when designing future interventions to increase access, carrying, and use of naloxone.

Patient perspectives on naloxone receipt in the emergency department: a qualitative exploration

Background

Emergency departments (EDs) are important venues for the distribution of naloxone to patients at high risk of opioid overdose, but less is known about patient perceptions on naloxone or best practices for patient education and communication. Our aim was to conduct an in-depth exploration of knowledge and attitudes toward ED naloxone distribution among patients who received a naloxone prescription.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 25 adult participants seen and discharged from three urban, academic EDs in Philadelphia, PA, with a naloxone prescription between November 2020 and February 2021. Interviews focused on awareness of naloxone as well as attitudes and experiences receiving naloxone in the ED. We used thematic content analysis to identify key themes reflecting patient attitudes and experiences.

Results

Of the 25 participants, 72% had previously witnessed an overdose and 48% had personally experienced a non-fatal overdose. Nineteen participants (76%) self-disclosed a history of substance use or overdose, and one reported receiving an opioid prescription during their ED visit and no history of substance use. In interviews, we identified wide variability in participant levels of knowledge about overdose risk, the role of naloxone in reducing risk, and naloxone access. A subset of participants was highly engaged with community harm reduction resources and well versed in naloxone access and use. A second subset was familiar with naloxone, but largely obtained it through healthcare settings such as the ED, while a final group was largely unfamiliar with naloxone. While most participants expressed positive attitudes about receiving naloxone from the ED, the quality of discussions with ED providers was variable, with some participants not even aware they were receiving a naloxone prescription until discharge.

Conclusions

Naloxone prescribing in the ED was acceptable and valued by most participants, but there are missed opportunities for communication and education. These findings underscore the critical role that EDs play in mitigating risks for patients who are not engaged with other healthcare or community health providers and can inform future work about the effective implementation of harm reduction strategies in ED settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12954-022-00677-7.

Fentanyl preference among people who use opioids in New York City

BACKGROUND

Several studies have pointed to a sub-sample of people who use drugs (PWUD) who prefer the use of non-pharmaceutical fentanyl (NPF) and, as such, pose a unique challenge for public health initiatives amidst the continued rise in overdose mortality. However, matters of drug preference and autonomy of choice remain under-studied and often misunderstood. This paper examined the experiences of PWUD reporting a preference for NPF or an NPF-heroin mixture, specifically how they navigate the perceived benefits of NPF and its established risks.

METHODS

22 in-depth interviews were conducted in New York City between March 2018 and August 2019 with PWUD who self-reported a preference for NPF or an NPF-heroin mix. Interviews were audio-recorded, and the resulting transcripts analyzed using a thematic approach.

RESULTS

Participants highlighted various factors that contributed to expressed preference for NPF or an NPF-heroin mix, including a desire to feel good, financial resources, drug availability, decreased consumer autonomy, and physiological demand. Participants reported practicing several risk reduction strategies; however, they highlighted that many, particularly carrying naloxone and always using with someone else, were difficult to implement in the context of illicit drug use.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate participants' decreased consumer agency and greater exposure to systemic factors in the illicit markets, highlighting the need for expansion of various services, including drug checking resources and systems of outreach for PWUD who do not use intravenously. To promote tailored interventions, continued efforts in overdose prevention ought to more thoughtfully consider the context, perceptions, preferences, and behaviors of PWUD.

Businesses in high drug use areas as potential sources of naloxone during overdose emergencies

INTRODUCTION

Naloxone distribution remains a cornerstone of a public health approach to combating the ongoing opioid overdose crisis. Most distribution programs focus on providing naloxone to individuals who use drugs or those closely associated with them (e.g., family). Utilizing businesses as fixed location sources of naloxone could be a valuable supplemental strategy to preventing fatal overdoses that is underexplored in the literature.

METHODS

We surveyed business owners and employees (N = 149) located in neighborhoods characterized by high rates of drug use in Baltimore City. Participants reported their interactions with people who use drugs as well as if they had heard of naloxone, if the business had naloxone on the premises, and how many employees were trained to use naloxone.

RESULTS

Most participants reported seeing individuals under the influence of drugs (93%), public drug use (80%), and overdose (66%) while at work. 66% of participants had heard of naloxone. Among those who had heard of naloxone, only 39% reported that there was a naloxone kit in the business and 28% of businesses had multiple employees trained to use naloxone.

CONCLUSIONS

Businesses are underutilized as potential reliable sources of naloxone. While study participants reported high levels of exposure to drug use and overdose in and around their businesses, their ability to intervene was limited. Efforts to train employees to respond to overdoses and to keep naloxone on site are warranted to supplement existing naloxone distribution efforts and can help empower business staff to help prevent overdose mortality in their communities.

Characteristics of and Experience Among People Who Use Take-Home Naloxone in Skåne County, Sweden

Background

Opioid overdose related injury or death can be prevented by bystander naloxone administration. For naloxone to be present when and where overdoses occur, opioid prevention education and naloxone distribution (OPEND) must be established on a broad level. This is the 30-month follow-up of the first multi-site naloxone project in Sweden, implemented at 31 sites in the County of Skåne 2018.

Aim

To address participant characteristics and factors associated with returning for naloxone refill and with having used naloxone for overdose reversal. An additional aim was to describe self-reported reasons for naloxone refill and overdose experiences.

Methods

Data were collected during June 2018—December 2020 through questionnaires at baseline and upon naloxone refill of the initial and subsequent naloxone kit. Descriptive statistics was used to address participant characteristics, those returning for naloxone refill and reporting overdose reversal. Chi-2 test was used for variable comparison between groups. Factors associated with overdose reversals were examined by logistic regression analysis. Reasons for naloxone refill, overdose situation and management were presented descriptively.

Results

Among 1,079 study participants, 22% (n = 235) returned for naloxone refill, of which 60% (n = 140) reported a total of 229 overdose reversals. Reversals were more likely to be reported by participants trained at needle exchange programs (NEPs) [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 5.18, 95% Confidence interval (CI) = 3.38–7.95)], with previous experience of own (AOR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.03–2.58) or witnessed (AOR = 2.12, 95% CI = 1.05–4.29) overdose, or who had used sedatives during the last 30 days before initial training (AOR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.04–2.33). A majority of overdoses reportedly occurred in private settings (62%), where the victim was a friend (35%) or acquaintance (31%) of the rescuer.

Conclusion

Participants with own risk factors associated with overdose (e.g., injection use, concomitant use of benzodiazepines and previous experience of own overdose) were more likely to report administering naloxone for overdose reversal. Overdose management knowledge was high. The findings indicate that implementation of multi-site OPEND reaches individuals at particularly high risk of own overdose in settings with limited previous harm reduction strategies and favors a further scaling up of naloxone programs in similar settings.

Factors associated with opioid overdose during medication-assisted treatment: How can we identify individuals at risk?

BACKGROUND

Due to the loss of tolerance to opioids during medication-assisted treatment (MAT), this period may represent a time of heightened risk for overdose. Identifying factors associated with increased risk of overdose during treatment is therefore paramount to improving outcomes. We aimed to determine the prevalence of opioid overdoses in patients receiving MAT. Additionally, we explored factors associated with opioid overdose during MAT and the association between length of time enrolled in MAT and overdose.

METHODS

Data were collected prospectively from 2360 participants receiving outpatient MAT in Ontario, Canada. Participants were divided into three groups by overdose status: no history of overdose, any lifetime history of overdose, and emergency department visit for opioid overdose in the last year. We used a multivariate multinomial regression model to assess demographic and clinical factors associated with overdose status.

RESULTS

Twenty-four percent of participants reported a lifetime history of overdose (n = 562), and 8% reported an emergency department (ED) visit for opioid overdose in the last year (n = 179). Individuals with a recent ED visit for opioid overdose were in treatment for shorter duration (odds ratio [OR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87, 0.97, p = 0.001). Individuals with a lifetime or recent history of overdose were more likely to be younger in age (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89, 0.98, p = 0.007 and OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77, 0.92, p < 0.001, respectively), report more physical symptoms (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01, 1.03, p = 0.005 and OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01, 1.05, p = 0.005, respectively), and had higher rates of non-prescription benzodiazepine use (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.32, 2.66, p < 0.001 and OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.43, 3.81, p = 0.001, respectively) compared to individuals with no history of overdose.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable number of patients enrolled in MAT have experienced overdose. Our study highlights that there are identifiable factors associated with a patient's overdose status that may represent areas for intervention. In particular, longer duration in MAT is associated with a decreased risk of overdose.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of take-home naloxone (THN) ownership and carriage

BACKGROUND

Drug-related deaths globally are increasing year on year, with the largest proportion of these being opioid-related. The opioid antagonist naloxone distributed for take-home use ('Take-Home Naloxone (THN)') has been championed as one method of tackling this public health crisis, however to be effective it must be available at an opioid overdose. Ownership and carriage are therefore fundamental to THN success. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of ownership and carriage of THN internationally among people who use drugs (PWUD).

METHODS

NHS Scotland Journals, AMED, EMBASE, HMIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL Complete, PubMed, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO and grey literature were searched for articles which measured prevalence of THN ownership or carriage between 1996 and 2020. Ownership was defined as report of a personal supply of THN. Carriage was defined as the participant carrying THN on their person at time of data collection or reporting a frequency of how often they carry THN. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Checklist for Prevalence Studies.

RESULTS

Systematic search yielded 6363 papers, with ten eligible papers identified. Eight articles were included in ownership prevalence and five articles included for carriage prevalence, with an overlap of three studies between both measures. Pooled prevalence indicated moderate ownership levels (57%, CI 47-67%) but lower carriage levels (20%, CI 12-31%). Analysis was complicated by the limited number of available studies and lack of standardised terminology and measurement.

CONCLUSION

Understanding naloxone ownership and carriage globally is hampered by limited evidence and heterogeneity across studies. From the available data, prevalence of THN carriage overall appears low, despite moderate ownership. Given the variation across studies, future research should seek to utilise more standardised terminology and methods of measurement. Furthermore, services distributing THN must ensure the importance of regular carriage of naloxone is consistently emphasised.

Sex Differences in Substance Use and Misuse: A Toxicology Investigators' Consortium (ToxIC) Registry Analysis

Background

Variations between male and female populations are previously reported in classes of harmfully used/misused drugs, severity of substance use disorder and risk of relapse. The aim of this study was to provide a review of bedside medical toxicologist managed, sex-specific poisonings in adults that present with harmful drug use/misuse.

Methods

ToxIC Registry cases ≥19 and ≤65 years old, with harmful drug use or misuse during the timeframe June 2010–December 2016, were studied. Demographics, primary agents of toxic exposure, administration route and complications were analyzed. Descriptive methods were used in the analysis.

Results

The database included 51,440 cases. Of these, 3426 cases were analyzed in which the primary reason for the encounter was harmful substance use/misuse. Females were found to harmfully use/misuse pharmaceutical drugs (N=806, 65.6%) more than nonpharmaceutical drugs (N=423, 34.4%). Males more frequently used nonpharmaceutical drugs (N=1189, 54.1%) than pharmaceutical drugs (1008, 45.9%). Analgesics were used by females (N= 215, 18.2%) and males (N=137, 6.6%). Sedative hypnotics were used by females (N=165, 14%) and males (N=160, 7.8%). Psychoactive agents were used by males (N=325, 15.8%) and females (N=67, 5.7%). Sympathomimetics were used by males (N=381, 18.5%) and females (N=151, 12.8%). The majority of both male and female participants, 1712 (57.9%), utilized an oral route of administration. However, 312 (16.5%) of males utilized inhalation vs 73 (6.8%) of females inhaled their substance.

Conclusion

There were sex-specific differences among patients evaluated for harmful substance use/misuse by toxicologists. Considering these differences in regards to management and preventive approaches may be indicated.

More than just availability: Who has access and who administers take-home naloxone in Baltimore, MD

Background

Fatal opioid overdose is a pressing public health concern in the United States. Addressing barriers and augmenting facilitators to take-home naloxone (THN) access and administration could expand program reach in preventing fatal overdoses.

Methods

THN access (i.e., being prescribed or receiving THN) was assessed in a Baltimore, Maryland-based sample of 577 people who use opioids (PWUO) and had a history of injecting drugs. A sub-analysis examined correlates of THN administration among those with THN access and who witnessed an overdose (N = 345). Logistic generalized estimating equations with robust standard errors were used to identify facilitators and barriers to accessing and using THN.

Results

The majority of PWUO (66%) reported THN access. In the multivariable model, decreased THN access was associated with the fear that a person may become aggressive after being revived with THN (aOR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.35–0.85), police threaten people at an overdose event (aOR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.36–1.00), and insufficient overdose training (aOR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.28–0.68). Enrollment in medication-assisted treatment, personally experiencing an overdose, and graduating from high school were associated with higher access. About half (49%) of PWUO with THN access and who had witnessed an overdose reported having administered THN. THN use was positively associated with “often” or “always” carrying THN (aOR: 3.47, 95% CI: 1.99–6.06), witnessing more overdoses (aOR:5.18, 95% CI: 2.22–12.07), experiencing recent homelessness, and injecting in the past year. THN use was reduced among participants who did not feel that they had sufficient overdose training (aOR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.32–0.96).

Conclusion

THN programs must bolster confidence in administering THN and address barriers to use, such as fear of a THN recipient becoming aggressive. Normative change around carrying THN is an important component in an overdose prevention strategy.

Beliefs Associated with Pharmacy-Based Naloxone: a Qualitative Study of Pharmacy-Based Naloxone Purchasers and People at Risk for Opioid Overdose

Drug overdose is the leading cause of unintentional death in the USA and the majority of deaths involve an opioid. Pharmacies are playing an increasingly important role in getting naloxone-the antidote to an opioid overdose-into the community. The aim of the current study was to understand, from the perspective of those who had obtained naloxone at the pharmacy, whose drug using status and pain patient status was not known until the interviews were conducted, as well as those who had not obtained naloxone at the pharmacy but were at risk for overdose, factors that impact the likelihood of obtaining pharmacy-based naloxone (PBN). Fifty-two participants from two New England states were interviewed between August 2016 and April 2017. We used a phenomenological approach to investigate participants' beliefs about pharmacy-based naloxone. The social contextual model was chosen to structure the collection and analysis of the qualitative data as it takes into account individual, interpersonal, organizational (pharmacy), community, and societal influences on a specific health behavior. Of the 52 people interviewed, 24 participants had obtained naloxone from the pharmacy in the past year, of which 4% (n = 1) self-disclosed during the interview current illicit drug use and 29% (n = 7) mentioned using prescribed opioid pain medication. Of the 28 people who had not obtained naloxone from the pharmacy, 46% (n = 13) had obtained an over the counter syringe from a pharmacy in the past month and had used an opioid in the past month, and 54% (n = 15) had used a prescribed opioid pain medication in the past month but did not report a syringe purchase. Several main themes emerged from the interview data. Individual-level themes were as follows: helplessness and fear, naloxone as empowerment to help, and past experiences at the pharmacy. Interpersonal-level themes were as follows: concern for family and friends, and sources of harm reduction information. Themes associated with pharmacy-level influence were as follows: perceived stigma from pharmacists, confusion at the pharmacy counter, and receptivity to pharmacists' offer of naloxone; community-level themes were as follows: community caretaking and need for education and training. Finally, themes at the societal-level of influence were as follows: generational crisis, and frustration at lack of response to opioid crisis. Overall our findings reveal factors at multiple levels which may play a role in likelihood of obtaining naloxone at the pharmacy. These factors can be used to inform interventions seeking to increase provision of pharmacy-based naloxone.