Objectives
The opioid crisis has risen dramatically in North America in the new millennium, due to both illegal and prescription opioid use. While emergency departments (EDs) represent a potentially ...strategic setting for interventions to reduce harm from opioid use disorder (OUD), the absence of a recent synthesis of literature limits implementation and scalability. To fill this gap, we conducted a systematic review of the literature on interventions targeting OUDs initiated in EDs.
Methods
Using an explicit search strategy (PROSPERO), the MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, EMBASE, and EBM reviews databases were searched from 1980 to October 4, 2019. The gray literature was explored using Google Scholar. Study characteristics were ed independently. The methodologic quality and risk of bias were assessed.
Results
Twelve of 2,270 studies met the inclusion criteria (two of high quality). In addition to the heterogeneity of the outcome measures used (retention in treatment, opioid consumption, and overdose), brief intervention and buprenorphine initiation (six of 12 studies) were the most documented with mixed effects for the former and positive short‐term and confined to single ED sites effects for the latter.
Conclusion
Emergency departments can be an appropriate setting for initiating opioid agonist treatment, but to be sustained, it likely needs to be coupled with community‐based follow‐up and support to ensure longer‐term retention. The scarcity of high‐quality evidence on OUD interventions initiated in emergency settings highlights the need for future research.
To capture pandemic experiences of people with opioid use disorder (OUD) to better inform the programs that serve them.
We designed, conducted, and analyzed semi-structured qualitative interviews ...using grounded theory. We conducted interviews until theme saturation was reached and we iteratively developed a codebook of emerging themes. Individuals with lived experience of substance use provided feedback at all steps of the study.
We conducted phone or in-person interviews in compliance with physical distancing and public health regulations in outdoor Vancouver parks or well-ventilated indoor spaces between June to September 2020.
Using purposive sampling, we recruited participants (n = 19) who were individuals with OUD enrolled in an intensive community outreach program, had visited one of two emergency departments, were over 18, lived within catchment, and were not already receiving opioid agonist therapy.
We audio-recorded interviews, which were later transcribed verbatim and checked for accuracy while removing all identifiers. Interviews explored participants' knowledge of COVID-19 and related safety measures, changes to drug use and healthcare services, and community impacts of COVID-19.
One third of participants were women, approximately two thirds had stable housing, and ages ranged between 23 and 59 years old. Participants were knowledgeable on COVID-19 public health measures. Some participants noted that fear decreased social connection and reluctance to help reverse overdoses; others expressed pride in community cohesion during crisis. Several participants mentioned decreased access to housing, harm reduction, and medical care services. Several participants reported using drugs alone more frequently, consuming different or fewer drugs because of supply shortages, or using more drugs to replace lost activities.
COVID-19 had profound effects on the social lives, access to services, and risk-taking behaviour of people with opioid use disorder. Pandemic public health measures must include risk mitigation strategies to maintain access to critical opioid-related services.
Many people experience imprisonment each year, and this population bears a disproportionate burden of morbidity and mortality. States have an obligation to provide equitable health care in prison and ...to attend to care on release. Our objective was to describe health care utilization in prison and post-release for persons released from provincial prison in Ontario, Canada in 2010, and to compare health care utilization with the general population.
We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study. We included all persons released from provincial prison to the community in 2010, and age- and sex-matched general population controls. We linked identities for persons released from prison to administrative health data. We matched each person by age and sex with four general population controls. We examined ambulatory care and emergency department utilization and medical-surgical and psychiatric hospitalization, both in prison and in the three months after release to the community. We compared rates with those of the general population.
The rates of all types of health care utilization were significantly higher in prison and on release for people released from prison (N = 48,861) compared to general population controls (N = 195,444). Comparing those released from prison to general population controls in prison and in the 3 months after release, respectively, utilization rates were 5.3 (95% CI 5.2, 5.4) and 2.4 (95% CI 2.4, 2.5) for ambulatory care, 3.5 (95% CI 3.3, 3.7) and 5.0 (95% CI 4.9, 5.3) for emergency department utilization, 2.3 (95% CI 2.0, 2.7) and 3.2 (95% CI 2.9, 3.5) for medical-surgical hospitalization, and 21.5 (95% CI 16.7, 27.7) and 17.5 (14.4, 21.2) for psychiatric hospitalization. Comparing the time in prison to the week after release, ambulatory care use decreased from 16.0 (95% CI 15.9,16.1) to 10.7 (95% CI 10.5, 10.9) visits/person-year, emergency department use increased from 0.7 (95% CI 0.6, 0.7) to 2.6 (95% CI 2.5, 2.7) visits/person-year, and hospitalization increased from 5.4 (95% CI 4.8, 5.9) to 12.3 (95% CI 10.1, 14.6) admissions/100 person-years for medical-surgical reasons and from 8.6 (95% CI 7.9, 9.3) to 17.3 (95% CI 14.6, 20.0) admissions/100 person-years for psychiatric reasons.
Across care types, health care utilization in prison and on release is elevated for people who experience imprisonment in Ontario, Canada. This may reflect high morbidity and suboptimal access to quality health care. Future research should identify reasons for increased use and interventions to improve care.
The opioid crisis is a growing public health emergency and increasing resources are being directed towards overdose education. Simulation has emerged as a novel strategy for training overdose ...response, yet little is known about training non-clinicians in bystander resuscitation. Understanding the perspectives of individuals who are likely to experience or witness opioid overdose is critical to ensure that emergency response is effective. The Surviving Opioid Overdose with Naloxone Education and Resuscitation (SOONER) study evaluates the effectiveness of a novel naloxone education and distribution tool among people who are non-clinicians and likely to witness opioid overdose. Participants’ resuscitation skills are evaluated using a realistic overdose simulation as the primary outcome of the trial. The purpose of our study is to describe the experience of participants with the simulation process in the SOONER study. We employed a semi-structured debriefing interview and a follow up qualitative interview to understand the experience of participants with simulation. A qualitative content analysis was performed using data from 21 participants who participated in the SOONER study. Our qualitative analysis identified 5 themes and 17 subthemes which described the experience of participants within the simulation process. These themes included realism, valuing practical experience, improving self-efficacy, gaining new perspective and bidirectional learning. Our analysis found that simulation was a positive and empowering experience for participants in the SOONER trial, most of whom are marginalized in society. Our study supports the notion that expanding simulation-based education to non-clinicians may offer an acceptable and effective way of supplementing current opioid overdose education strategies. Increasing the accessibility of simulation-based education may represent a paradigm shift whereby simulation is transformed from a primarily academic practice into a patient-based community resource.
Tamper-resistant drugs cannot solve the opioid crisis Leece, Pamela; Orkin, Aaron M; Kahan, Meldon
Canadian Medical Association journal (CMAJ),
2015-Jul-14, 2015-07-14, 20150714, Letnik:
187, Številka:
10
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Tamper-resistant formulations, designed to make drugs harder to crush, snort or inject, are being promoted in Canada and the United States as a strategy to prevent opioidrelated harms such as ...overdose and addiction. In a research article published in CMAJ Open, Gomes and colleagues1 examined the effects of tamper-resistant opioid formulations on patterns of prescribing near the US-Canada border. Although it is important to understand the effects of such interventions, clinicians should use careful judgment when prescribing any opioid and not be distracted by tamper-resistance as a panacea to reduce opioid-related harms. Regulations requiring tamper resistance will likely do little to address the opioid epidemic and may serve merely to line the pockets of drug companies while diverting policy-makers' attention away from more meaningful and effective interventions. Growing epidemiologic evidence shows that the introduction of tamper-resistant formulations has not lowered the rates of opioid-related deaths at a population level. In Ontario and the US, overall rates of opioid-related deaths have continued to rise since the long-acting formulation of oxycodone (OxyContin) was replaced with a tamper-resistant formulation (in 2012 and 2010, respectively).2,10 Rather, there is increasing evidence that individuals shift to other opioids, including uncontrolled formulations such as heroin, when availability of prescription opioids changes.3 The rate of death from heroin poisoning in the US accelerated steeply after 2010, when long-acting oxycodone was restricted.3 In Ontario, hydromor- phone and fentanyl prescriptions increased by 79% and 20%, respectively, between 2009 and 2013 as the provincial government limited oxycodone availability.11 Lastly, opioid prescribing may increase if tamper-resistant formulations are marketed and perceived as being more safe. In the case of OxyContin, aggressive marketing strategies influenced physician prescribing by exaggerating opioid benefits and minimizing risks.2 Similar marketing may lead to overprescribing of tamper-resistant formulations, especially if prescribers believe that such formulations reduce prescriber liability or confer safety benefits for their patients. Counterintuitively, companies that make and market opioids will probably see increased profits through overuse of patented tamper-resistant formulations.
Extenuating circumstances can trigger unplanned changes to randomized trials and introduce methodological, ethical, feasibility, and analytical challenges that can potentially compromise the validity ...of findings. Numerous randomized trials have required changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but guidance for reporting such modifications is incomplete.
As a joint extension for the CONSORT and SPIRIT reporting guidelines, CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstances) aims to improve reporting of trial protocols and completed trials that undergo important modifications in response to extenuating circumstances.
A panel of 37 international trial investigators, patient representatives, methodologists and statisticians, ethicists, funders, regulators, and journal editors convened to develop the guideline. The panel developed CONSERVE following an accelerated, iterative process between June 2020 and February 2021 involving (1) a rapid literature review of multiple databases (OVID Medline, OVID EMBASE, and EBSCO CINAHL) and gray literature sources from 2003 to March 2021; (2) consensus-based panelist meetings using a modified Delphi process and surveys; and (3) a global survey of trial stakeholders.
The rapid review yielded 41 673 citations, of which 38 titles were relevant, including emerging guidance from regulatory and funding agencies for managing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on trials. However, no generalizable guidance for all circumstances in which trials and trial protocols might face unanticipated modifications were identified. The CONSERVE panel used these findings to develop a consensus reporting guidelines following 4 rounds of meetings and surveys. Responses were received from 198 professionals from 34 countries, of whom 90% (n = 178) indicated that they understood the concept definitions and 85.4% (n = 169) indicated that they understood and could use the implementation tool. Feedback from survey respondents was used to finalize the guideline and confirm that the guideline's core concepts were applicable and had utility for the trial community. CONSERVE incorporates an implementation tool and checklists tailored to trial reports and trial protocols for which extenuating circumstances have resulted in important modifications to the intended study procedures. The checklists include 4 sections capturing extenuating circumstances, important modifications, responsible parties, and interim data analyses.
CONSERVE offers an extension to CONSORT and SPIRIT that could improve the transparency, quality, and completeness of reporting important modifications to trials in extenuating circumstances such as COVID-19.
Task shifting and sharing (TS/S) involves the redistribution of health tasks within workforces and communities. Conceptual frameworks lay out the key factors, constructs, and variables involved in a ...given phenomenon, as well as the relationships between those factors. Though TS/S is a leading strategy to address health worker shortages and improve access to services worldwide, a conceptual framework for this approach is lacking.
We used an online Delphi process to engage an international panel of scholars with experience in knowledge synthesis concerning TS/S and develop a conceptual framework for TS/S. We invited 55 prospective panelists to participate in a series of questionnaires exploring the purpose of TS/S and the characteristics of contexts amenable to TS/S programmes. Panelist responses were analysed and integrated through an iterative process to achieve consensus on the elements included in the conceptual framework.
The panel achieved consensus concerning the included concepts after three Delphi rounds among 15 panelists. The COATS Framework (Concepts and Opportunities to Advance Task Shifting and Task Sharing) offers a refined definition of TS/S and a general purpose statement to guide TS/S programmes. COATS describes that opportunities for health system improvement arising from TS/S programmes depending on the implementation context, and enumerates eight necessary conditions and important considerations for implementing TS/S programmes.
The COATS Framework offers a conceptual model for TS/S programmes. The COATS Framework is comprehensive and adaptable, and can guide refinements in policy, programme development, evaluation, and research to improve TS/S globally.
We aimed to compare 30-day readmission after medical-surgical hospitalization for people who experience imprisonment and matched people in the general population in Ontario, Canada. We used linked ...population-based correctional and health administrative data. Of people released from Ontario prisons in 2010, we identified those with at least one medical or surgical hospitalization between 2005 and 2015 while they were in prison or within 6 months after release. For those with multiple eligible hospitalizations, we randomly selected one hospitalization. We stratified people by whether they were in prison or recently released from prison at the time of hospital discharge. We matched each person with a person in the general population based on age, sex, hospitalization case mix group, and hospital discharge year. Our primary outcome was 30-day hospital readmission. We included 262 hospitalizations for people in prison and 1,268 hospitalizations for people recently released from prison. Readmission rates were 7.7% (95%CI 4.4-10.9) for people in prison and 6.9% (95%CI 5.5-8.3) for people recently released from prison. Compared with matched people in the general population, the unadjusted HR was 0.72 (95%CI 0.41-1.27) for people in prison and 0.78 (95%CI 0.60-1.02) for people recently released from prison. Adjusted for baseline morbidity and social status, hospitalization characteristics, and post-discharge health care use, the HR for 30-day readmission was 0.74 (95%CI 0.40-1.37) for people in prison and 0.48 (95%CI 0.36-0.63) for people recently released from prison. In conclusion, people recently released from prison had relatively low rates of readmission. Research is needed to elucidate reasons for lower readmission to ensure care quality and access.
PDF
