"It's just another tool on my toolbelt": New York state law enforcement officer experiences administering naloxone.

BACKGROUND: Although naloxone is widely acknowledged as a life-saving intervention and a critical tool for first responders, there remains a need to explore how law enforcement officers have adapted to a shifting scope of work. Past research has focused mainly on officer training, their abilities to administer naloxone, and to a lesser extent on their experiences and interactions working with people who use drugs (PWUD). METHODS: A qualitative approach was used to explore officer perspectives and behaviors surrounding responses to incidents of suspected opioid overdose. Between the months of March and September 2017, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 38 officers from 17 counties across New York state (NYS). RESULTS: Analysis of in-depth interviews revealed that officers generally considered the additional responsibility of administering naloxone to have become "part of the job". Many officers reported feeling as though they are expected to wear multiple hats, functioning as both law enforcement and medical personnel and at times juggling contradictory roles. Evolving views on drugs and drug use defined many interviews, as well as the recognition that a punitive approach to working with PWUD is not the solution, emphasizing the need for cohesive, community-wide support strategies. Notable differences in attitudes toward PWUD appeared to be influenced by an officer's connection to someone who uses drugs and/or due to a background in emergency medical services. CONCLUSION: Law enforcement officers in NYS are emerging as an integral part of the continuum of care for PWUD. Our findings are capturing a time of transition as more traditional approaches to law enforcement appear to be shifting toward those prioritizing prevention and diversion. Widespread adoption of naloxone administration by law enforcement officers in NYS is a powerful example of the successful integration of a public health intervention into police work.

Naloxone administration by law enforcement officers in New York State (2015-2020).

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified the need for wide deployment of effective harm reduction strategies in preventing opioid overdose mortality. Placing naloxone in the hands of key responders, including law enforcement officers who are often first on the scene of a suspected overdose, is one such strategy. New York State (NYS) was one of the first states to implement a statewide law enforcement naloxone administration program. This article provides an overview of the law enforcement administration of naloxone in NYS between 2015 and 2020 and highlights key characteristics of over 9000 opioid overdose reversal events. METHODS: Data in naloxone usage report forms completed by police officers were compiled and analyzed. Data included 9133 naloxone administration reports by 5835 unique officers located in 60 counties across NYS. Descriptive statistics were used to examine attributes of the aided individuals, including differences between fatal and non-fatal incidents. Additional descriptive analyses were conducted for incidents in which law enforcement officers arrived first at the scene of suspected overdose. Comparisons were made to examine year-over-year trends in administration as naloxone formulations were changed. Quantitative analysis was supplemented by content analysis of officers' notes (n = 2192). RESULTS: In 85.9% of cases, law enforcement officers arrived at the scene of a suspected overdose prior to emergency medical services (EMS) personnel. These officers assessed the likelihood of an opioid overdose having occurred based on the aided person's breathing status and other information obtained on the scene. They administered an average of 2 doses of naloxone to aided individuals. In 36.8% of cases, they reported additional administration of naloxone by other responders including EMS, fire departments, and laypersons. Data indicated the aided survived the suspected overdose in 87.4% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: With appropriate training, law enforcement personnel were able to recognize opioid overdoses and prevent fatalities by administering naloxone and carrying out time-sensitive medical interventions. These officers provided life-saving services to aided individuals alongside other responders including EMS, fire departments, and bystanders. Further expansion of law enforcement naloxone administration nationally and internationally could help decrease opioid overdose mortality.

Naloxone administration by law enforcement officers in New York State (2015–2020)

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified the need for wide deployment of effective harm reduction strategies in preventing opioid overdose mortality. Placing naloxone in the hands of key responders, including law enforcement officers who are often first on the scene of a suspected overdose, is one such strategy. New York State (NYS) was one of the first states to implement a statewide law enforcement naloxone administration program. This article provides an overview of the law enforcement administration of naloxone in NYS between 2015 and 2020 and highlights key characteristics of over 9000 opioid overdose reversal events. Methods Data in naloxone usage report forms completed by police officers were compiled and analyzed. Data included 9133 naloxone administration reports by 5835 unique officers located in 60 counties across NYS. Descriptive statistics were used to examine attributes of the aided individuals, including differences between fatal and non-fatal incidents. Additional descriptive analyses were conducted for incidents in which law enforcement officers arrived first at the scene of suspected overdose. Comparisons were made to examine year-over-year trends in administration as naloxone formulations were changed. Quantitative analysis was supplemented by content analysis of officers’ notes (n = 2192). Results In 85.9% of cases, law enforcement officers arrived at the scene of a suspected overdose prior to emergency medical services (EMS) personnel. These officers assessed the likelihood of an opioid overdose having occurred based on the aided person’s breathing status and other information obtained on the scene. They administered an average of 2 doses of naloxone to aided individuals. In 36.8% of cases, they reported additional administration of naloxone by other responders including EMS, fire departments, and laypersons. Data indicated the aided survived the suspected overdose in 87.4% of cases. Conclusions With appropriate training, law enforcement personnel were able to recognize opioid overdoses and prevent fatalities by administering naloxone and carrying out time-sensitive medical interventions. These officers provided life-saving services to aided individuals alongside other responders including EMS, fire departments, and bystanders. Further expansion of law enforcement naloxone administration nationally and internationally could help decrease opioid overdose mortality.

COVID-19 Outcomes Among Persons Living With or Without Diagnosed HIV Infection in New York State.

Importance: New York State has been an epicenter for both the US coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and HIV/AIDS epidemics. Persons living with diagnosed HIV may be more prone to COVID-19 infection and severe outcomes, yet few studies have assessed this possibility at a population level. Objective: To evaluate the association between HIV diagnosis and COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalization, and in-hospital death in New York State. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study, conducted in New York State, including New York City, between March 1 and June 15, 2020, matched data from HIV surveillance, COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed diagnoses, and hospitalization databases to provide a full population-level comparison of COVID-19 outcomes between persons living with diagnosed HIV and persons living without diagnosed HIV. Exposures: Diagnosis of HIV infection through December 31, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalization, and in-hospital death. COVID-19 diagnoses, hospitalizations, and in-hospital death rates comparing persons living with diagnosed HIV with persons living without dianosed HIV were computed, with unadjusted rate ratios and indirect standardized rate ratios (sRR), adjusting for sex, age, and region. Adjusted rate ratios (aRRs) for outcomes specific to persons living with diagnosed HIV were assessed by age, sex, region, race/ethnicity, transmission risk, and CD4+ T-cell count-defined HIV disease stage, using Poisson regression models. Results: A total of 2988 persons living with diagnosed HIV (2109 men [70.6%]; 2409 living in New York City [80.6%]; mean [SD] age, 54.0 [13.3] years) received a diagnosis of COVID-19. Of these persons living with diagnosed HIV, 896 were hospitalized and 207 died in the hospital through June 15, 2020. After standardization, persons living with diagnosed HIV and persons living without diagnosed HIV had similar diagnosis rates (sRR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.91-0.97]), but persons living with diagnosed HIV were hospitalized more than persons living without diagnosed HIV, per population (sRR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.29-1.47]) and among those diagnosed (sRR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.37-1.56]). Elevated mortality among persons living with diagnosed HIV was observed per population (sRR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.07-1.40]) and among those diagnosed (sRR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.13-1.48]) but not among those hospitalized (sRR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.83-1.09]). Among persons living with diagnosed HIV, non-Hispanic Black individuals (aRR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.40-1.81]) and Hispanic individuals (aRR, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.83-2.37]) were more likely to receive a diagnosis of COVID-19 than White individuals, but they were not more likely to be hospitalized once they received a diagnosis or to die once hospitalized. Hospitalization risk increased with disease progression to HIV stage 2 (aRR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.11-1.49]) and stage 3 (aRR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.38-2.07]) relative to stage 1. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, persons living with diagnosed HIV experienced poorer COVID-related outcomes relative to persons living without diagnosed HIV; Previous HIV diagnosis was associated with higher rates of severe disease requiring hospitalization, and hospitalization risk increased with progression of HIV disease stage.