Literature Collection

Opioid agonist medication, including methadone, is considered the first-line treatment for opioid use disorder. Methadone, when taken daily, reduces the risk of fatal overdose; however, overdose risk increases following medication cessation. Amid an overdose epidemic accelerated by the proliferation of fentanyl, ensuring continuity of methadone treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic is a vital public health priority. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(12):2115-2117. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306523).

BACKGROUND: As the death toll continues to rise in the opioid overdose epidemic, increasing access to medications for opioid use disorder (OUD), such as buprenorphine, is vital. Psychiatric clinical pharmacist practitioners (CPPs) can help bridge the gap in care but are limited in their ability to prescribe buprenorphine given federal restrictions. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe a pharmacist-psychiatrist collaborative practice designed to increase access to buprenorphine for OUD in rural communities by maximizing the CPP role. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: A CPP operating under a scope of practice with prescriptive authority to manage substance use disorders (SUDs) and comorbid mental health conditions was hired in June of 2020 at a rural Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital in Tomah, Wisconsin. PRACTICE INNOVATION: A collaborative agreement with X-waivered psychiatrists was established to manage buprenorphine for patients with OUD. EVALUATION METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on all patients with an OUD diagnosis from July 1, 2020, to October 31, 2021, to assess the use of medications for OUD, comorbid psychiatric, and SUD diagnoses; active naloxone prescription; and CPP involvement in care. For patients prescribed buprenorphine, their average wait time to initiation appointment was calculated in days and compared before and after CPP implementation. RESULTS: As of October 31, 2021, there were 60 patients with OUD cared for by the Tomah VA, of whom 28 received buprenorphine comanaged with the CPP. On average, those requesting urgent access appointment for buprenorphine assessment from the CPP were seen for same-day induction appointments compared with historically an average of a 6.1 day wait for outpatient appointments and 5.8 days for scheduled inpatient inductions. CONCLUSION: Collaborative approaches to buprenorphine management with a CPP improve access to care. Although collaboration decreases time burden for X-waivered psychiatrists, care could be more efficient and timely if a CPP could independently induct, stabilize, and manage patients on buprenorphine.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a pharmacistled intervention would increase the number of naloxone prescriptions and naloxone administration education in a primary care family medicine setting. DESIGN: Prospective quality improvement intervention in an academic family medicine clinic. METHODS: We surveyed providers about naloxone knowledge, prescribing habits, and prescribing barriers. We identified patients on chronic opioid therapy, through electronic health records for the year 2019. Overdose risk categories based upon morphine milligram equivalent doses and concomitant benzodiazepine use were used to determine patients who met criteria for naloxone. Pharmacists phoned qualified patients to discuss overdose risk and naloxone benefits. Patients who accepted naloxone prescriptions used their local pharmacy through a department-approved standing order set. RESULTS: From the survey results, there were 47 of 54 provider responses, and the majority noted that they do not routinely prescribe naloxone in high-risk patients. The predominant barriers were lack of time during visit and naloxone administration education. The population of patients from chart review included 93 high-risk patients with a mean age of 58 years. During the time of intervention, 71 patients remained eligible for naloxone coprescribing. Of the patients contacted, 29 (40 percent) accepted the intervention prescription, and subsequently, 22 picked up their prescription from the pharmacy. Sixteen received counseling with a support person. Twelve patients had naloxone already at home, and two received counseling with a support person. CONCLUSION: The naloxone prescribing intervention is achievable. The results of this intervention support identifying patients at increased risk of opioid overdose and offer education of a support person for naloxone in a large academic family medicine clinic.

BACKGROUND: Position statements clarify key issues that are in alignment with the vision, mission, and values of the AMERSA, Inc. (Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance use and Addiction). This Position Statement, endorsed by the AMERSA Board of Directors on October 3, 2023, amplifies the position of the organization, guides their activities, and informs the public and policymakers on the organization's stance on this issue. ISSUE: The unregulated drug supply in the United States evolves constantly, leaving those who use drugs potentially unaware of new adulterants in their drugs. Not knowing that information can leave people vulnerable to serious adverse events such as fatal overdoses, wounds, and other health consequences. Without real-time data on the composition of drugs available in a community, healthcare providers and public health practitioners are left with insufficient data, making it increasingly difficult to know how to best serve people who use drugs. In this context, community-based drug checking has become recognized as an important harm reduction strategy with the potential to provide those who use drugs with more information about their supply. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is imperative to expand funding and increase access to drug checking programs in communities across the United States. Key policy changes, such as those related to decriminalizing drug and drug paraphernalia possession, are needed to increase the utilization of drug checking programs. Protection of persons who use drugs through harm reduction strategies, including drug checking programs needs to be widely available and accessible.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Naloxone, an opioid-antagonist deliverable by an intra-nasal route, has become widely available and utilized by law enforcement officers as well as basic life support (BLS) providers in the prehospital setting. This study aimed to determine the frequency of repeat naloxone dosing in suspected narcotic overdose (OD) patients and identify patient characteristics. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients over 17 years of age with suspected opioid overdose, treated with an initial intranasal (IN) dose of naloxone and subsequently managed by paramedics, was performed from April 2014 to June 2016. Demographic data was analyzed using descriptive statistics to identify those aspects of the history, physical exam findings. Results: A sample size of 2166 patients with suspected opioid OD received naloxone from first responders. No patients who achieved GCS 15 after treatment required redosing; 195 (9%) received two doses and 53 patients received three doses of naloxone by advanced life support. Patients were primarily male (75.4%), Caucasian (88.2%), with a mean age of 36.4 years. A total of 76.7% of patients were found in the home, 23.1% had a suspected mixed ingestion, and 27.2% had a previous OD. Two percent of all patients required a third dose of naloxone. CONCLUSION: In this prehospital study, we confirmed that intranasal naloxone is effective in reversing suspected opioid toxicity. Nine percent of patients required two or more doses of naloxone to achieve clinical reversal of suspected opioid toxicity. Two percent of patients received a third dose of naloxone.

OBJECTIVE: To develop effective pharmacy-based interventions to mitigate harm from opioid use disorders. Programs include responsible opioid prescribing, expanded access to medication-assisted treatment (MAT), naloxone, and community interventions. SETTING: Clinical pharmacists practicing at Indian Health Service (IHS) locations in the Southwest, Midwest, and Great Lakes regions. These pharmacists serve culturally diverse American Indian populations throughout the United States and interface with tribal and federal programs to impact the opioid epidemic in Indian Country. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: Pharmacists have reduced barriers to care by expanding clinical practices to include novel approaches in pain management clinics and MAT programs. PRACTICE INNOVATION: As part of a multidisciplinary team, IHS pharmacists provide comprehensive patient care while focusing on the prevention of opioid dependence and opioid overdose death. EVALUATION: Pharmacists have also expanded professional competencies to include coprescribing naloxone and training first responders on naloxone use. RESULTS: Pharmacists within IHS have proactively completed advanced training on responsible opioid prescribing, augmented services to increase access to MAT for American Indians and Alaska Natives, and increased access to naloxone for opioid overdose reversal. Pharmacists have also developed a comprehensive training program and program measurement tools for law enforcement officers serving in tribal communities. These materials were used to train 350 officers in 6 districts and conduct a mass naloxone dispensing initiative across Indian Country. Pharmacists have consequently developed successful community coalitions that are focused on saving lives. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist involvement in key initiatives including responsible opioid prescribing, expanded access to MAT, and expanded access to naloxone for trained first responders, coupled with an emphasis on enhanced education, illustrates pharmacists' impact with the opioid epidemic.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone co-prescribing to individuals at increased opioid overdose risk is a key component of opioid overdose prevention efforts. OBJECTIVE: Examine naloxone co-prescribing in the general population and assess how co-prescribing varies by individual and community characteristics. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression of 2017-2018 de-identified pharmacy claims representing 90% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in 50 states and the District of Columbia. PATIENTS: Individuals with opioid analgesic treatment episodes > 90 days MAIN MEASURES: Outcome was co-prescribed naloxone. Predictor variables included insurance type, primary prescriber specialty, receipt of concomitant benzodiazepines, high-dose opioid episode, county urbanicity, fatal overdose rates, poverty rates, and primary care health professional shortage areas. KEY RESULTS: Naloxone co-prescribing occurred in 2.3% of long-term opioid therapy episodes. Medicaid (aOR 1.87, 95%CI 1.84 to 1.90) and Medicare (aOR 1.48, 95%CI 1.46 to 1.51) episodes had higher odds of naloxone co-prescribing than commercial insurance episodes, while cash pay (aOR 0.77, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.80) and other insurance episodes (aOR 0.81, 95%CI 0.79 to 0.83) had lower odds. Odds of naloxone co-prescribing were higher among high-dose opioid episodes (aOR 3.19, 95%CI 3.15 to 3.23), when concomitant benzodiazepines were prescribed (aOR 1.12, 95%CI 1.10 to 1.14), and in counties with higher fatal overdose rates. CONCLUSION: Co-prescription of naloxone 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, we found that co-prescribing rates remain low overall. States, insurers, and health systems should consider implementing strategies to facilitate increased co-prescribing of naloxone to at-risk individuals.

Vivitrol is an extended-release injectable formulation of naltrexone, administered as an intramuscular injection once a month. Naltrexone is an opioid-receptor antagonist that blocks the euphoric effects of opioids. Unlike other treatments for opioid use disorder, including buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone, naltrexone is not associated with the development of tolerance and dependence, and lacks the potential for misuse and diversion. However, because the oral formulation requires a daily dosage, poor adherence to the medication has limited its efficacy for the prevention of relapse in patients with opioid use disorder. The extended-release injectable formulation of naltrexone was developed to improve treatment adherence and retention. Vivitrol has not received marketing approval in Canada and is available only for research purposes or through Health Canada's Special Access Programme for the treatment of opioid use disorder or alcohol use disorder. In October 2010, the US FDA approved Vivitrol for the prevention of relapse to opioid dependence following opioid detoxification. Before starting Vivitrol, an opioid-free period of a minimum of seven to 10 days is recommended to avoid precipitating withdrawal, symptoms of which may be severe enough to require hospitalization. There are currently no recommendations to guide the duration of treatment with Vivitrol. Results from one phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial in patients with opioid use disorder who had recently undergone detoxification showed Vivitrol to be superior to placebo for improving abstinence and treatment retention, as well as for reducing opioid cravings over a six-month treatment period. Approximately one-half of patients who received Vivitrol for an additional year in an open-label extension study remained abstinent from opioids. Preliminary evidence from phase III trials and studies in real-world clinical settings demonstrates that Vivitrol may be beneficial for preventing relapse in two subpopulations: people living within the corrections system and people living with HIV. None of the phase III trials reported deaths due to overdose in patients receiving Vivitrol. The majority of commonly reported adverse effects, including nasopharyngitis (cold symptoms), insomnia, hypertension, influenza, and injection-site pain, were mild or moderate. Abnormal liver function test results occurred primarily in patients with existing hepatitis C infection, but were transient and not clinically significant. Severe injection-site reactions were noted in some patients. There are several clinical challenges and knowledge gaps associated with the initiation, long-term use, and role of Vivitrol relative to other treatments for opioid use disorder. These will need to be addressed when considering adopting Vivitrol in clinical practice. They include the approach to transitioning patients from other treatments (including methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone) to treatment with Vivitrol, pain management, duration of treatment, long-term risk of relapse and opioid overdose, efficacy and cost compared with other therapies for opioid use disorder, and use in certain subpopulations. When considering adopting Vivitrol in clinical practice, the requirement for total abstinence from opioids for seven to 10 days before initiating treatment may present a challenge. A Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, consisting of directions for proper injection technique and patient counselling materials, is in place in the US to inform health care providers and patients about the potentially serious risks associated with the use of Vivitrol, including severe injection-site reactions, sudden opioid withdrawal during treatment initiation, vulnerability to opioid overdose, and hepatotoxicity (drug-induced liver damage).

Resources to help improve communication between providers and patients about the risks and benefits of opioid therapy for chronic pain, improve the safety and effectiveness of pain treatment, and reduce the risks associated with long-term opioid therapy, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death.

The year 2021 was the most deadly year for overdose deaths in the USA and Canada. The stress and social isolation stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic coupled with a flood of fentanyl into local drug markets created conditions in which people who use drugs were more susceptible to accidental overdose. Within territorial, state, and local policy communities, there have been longstanding efforts to reduce morbidity and mortality within this population; however, the current overdose crisis clearly indicates an urgent need for additional, easily accessible, and innovative services. Street-based drug testing programs allow individuals to learn the composition of their substances prior to use, averting unintended overdoses while also creating low threshold opportunities for individuals to connect to other harm reduction services, including substance use treatment programs. We sought to capture perspectives from service providers to document best practices around fielding community-based drug testing programs, including optimizing their position within a constellation of other harm reduction services to best serve local communities. We conducted 11 in-depth interviews from June to November 2022 via Zoom with harm reduction service providers to explore barriers and facilitators around the implementation of drug checking programs, the potential for integration with other health promotion services, and best practices for sustaining these programs, taking the local community and policy landscape into account. Interviews lasted 45-60 min and were recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was used to reduce the data, and transcripts were discussed by a team of trained analysts. Several key themes emerged from our interviews: (1) the instability of drug markets amid an inconsistent and dangerous drug supply; (2) implementing drug checking services in dynamic environments in response to the rapidly changing needs of local communities; (3) training and ongoing capacity building needed to create sustainable programs; and (4) the potential for integrating drug checking programs into other services. There are opportunities for this service to make a difference in overdose deaths as the contours of the drug market itself have changed over time, but a number of challenges remain to implement them effectively and sustain the service over time. Drug checking itself represents a paradox within the larger policy context, putting the sustainability of these programs at risk and challenging the potential to scale these programs as the overdose epidemic worsens.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Opioid use and overdose remain a central and worsening public health emergency in the United States and abroad. Efforts to expand treatment have struggled to match the rising incidence of opioid use disorder (OUD), and treating patients in primary care settings represents one of the most promising opportunities to meet this need. Learning collaboratives (LCs) are one evidence-based strategy to improve implementation of medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in primary care. METHODS: We developed and studied a multidisciplinary MOUD learning collaborative involving six underserved primary care clinics. We used a mixed-methods approach to assess needs, develop curriculum, and evaluate outcomes from these clinics. RESULTS: We recruited six clinics to participate in the collaborative. Half had an established MOUD program. Approximately 80% of participants achieved their organizational quality improvement goals for the collaborative. After the collaborative, participants also reported a significant increase in their perceived competence to implement/improve a MOUD program (pre-LC competence=2.80, post-LC competence=6.33/10, P=.02). The most consistent barrier we identified was stigma around OUD and its effects on patients' ability to access services and staff/provider ability to provide services. The most frequent enablers of program success were trainee interest, organizational leadership support, and a dedicated MOUD care team. CONCLUSIONS: Organizations used clinical and systems improvement knowledge to enhance their existing programs or to take steps to create new programs. All participants identified the need for additional staff/clinician training, especially to overcome stigma around OUD. The outcomes demonstrated the crucial importance of long-term organizational support for program success.