Nurses' experiences caring for patients with opioid use disorders

The purpose of this study was to examine nurses' experience of quality care for hospitalized patients with a history of opioid use disorder or self-injection of opioids and whether hospital, unit, or nurse characteristics impacted experiences of quality care. A secondary aim of the study was to understand how nurses' experiences of quality care for this population have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The Institute of Medicine's Six Domains of Health Care Quality were used to define quality care in this study. A national sample of 179 nurses completed an online survey regarding their experiences caring for patients with opioid use disorders. The majority of the participants were staff nurses who worked in emergency departments, critical care units, or mother baby units. Only 41.9% of the participants had received education regarding substance use disorders from their employers, and even less had participated in harm reduction education. Only 45% of the nurses had knowledge regarding harm reduction strategies for this population. The participants experienced a low number of restrictive safety measures and an average number of adverse events and effective care interventions when caring for patients with opioid use disorders. The nurses rated quality care and satisfaction as average. Correlation and linear regression analysis suggested trends in nurse, hospital and unit characteristics that are associated with nurses' experiences caring for this population;substance use disorder education, harm reduction education, and unit type were most often associated with nurses' experiences. Content analysis of open-ended questions regarding equity, patient-centeredness, timeliness and the impact of COVID-19 on experiences of quality care supported quantitative findings in the study and provided insight into the nurses' experiences. The findings in this study contribute to current evidence regarding the need for standardized hospital policies and practices aimed at improving quality care for patients with opioid use disorders. These policies and practices should incorporate harm reduction strategies that are patient-centered and evidence-based. Hospitals and nursing schools should provide education aimed at reducing stigma and improving care for this population. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Clients' experiences on North America's first take-home injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) program: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: To support public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, oral opioid agonist treatment (OAT) take-home doses were expanded in Western countries with positive results. Injectable OAT (iOAT) take-home doses were previously not an eligible option, and were made available for the first time in several sites to align with public health measures. Building upon these temporary risk-mitigating guidelines, a clinic in Vancouver, BC continued to offer two of a possible three daily doses of take-home injectable medications to eligible clients. The present study explores the processes through which take-home iOAT doses impacted clients' quality of life and continuity of care in real-life settings. METHODS: Three rounds of semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted over a period of seventeen months beginning in July 2021 with eleven participants receiving iOAT take-home doses at a community clinic in Vancouver, British Columbia. Interviews followed a topic guide that evolved iteratively in response to emerging lines of inquiry. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then coded using NVivo 1.6 using an interpretive description approach. RESULTS: Participants reported that take-home doses granted them the freedom away from the clinic to have daily routines, form plans, and enjoy unstructured time. Participants appreciated the greater privacy, accessibility, and ability to engage in paid work. Furthermore, participants enjoyed greater autonomy to manage their medication and level of engagement with the clinic. These factors contributed to greater quality of life and continuity of care. Participants shared that their dose was too essential to divert and that they felt safe transporting and administering their medication off-site. In the future, all participants would like more accessible treatment such as access longer take-home prescriptions (e.g., one week), the ability to pick-up at different and convenient locations (e.g., community pharmacies), and a medication delivery service. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing the number of daily onsite injections from two or three to only one revealed the diversity of rich and nuanced needs that added flexibility and accessibility in iOAT can meet. Actions such as licencing diverse opioid medications/formulations, medication pick-up at community pharmacies, and a community of practice that supports clinical decisions are necessary to increase take-home iOAT accessibility.

A Focused Screening and Clinical Intervention with Streamlined Outpatient Linkage for Hospitalized Patients with Opioid Use Disorder Experiencing Homelessness.

Background: Patients experiencing homelessness have higher rates of substance use and related mortality, often driven by opioid overdose. Conversely, opioid use disorder (OUD) is a leading risk factor for homelessness. Our goal was to test the efficacy of an electronic health record (EHR) screen in identifying this vulnerable population during hospitalization and to assess the feasibility of a bundled intervention in improving opioid safety. Methods: We assessed patients' housing status, substance use, previous MOUD treatment, barriers to MOUD treatment and readiness to take MOUD in and out of the hospital. For each post discharge follow up call, patients were asked about their MOUD status, barriers accessing treatment, current substance use, and housing status. We also assessed team members perceptions and experiences of the study. Results: We enrolled 32 patients with housing insecurity and OUD. The mean age was 44, the majority self-identified as male (78%), and mostly as White (56%) or Black (38%). At each follow up within the 6-months post-discharge, reach rates were low: 40% of enrollees answered at least 1 call and the highest reach rate (31% of patients) occurred at week 4. At the third and sixth-month follow ups, >50% of subjects still taking MOUD were also using opioids. Conclusion: Our clinician augmented EHR screen accurately identified inpatients experiencing OUD and PEH. This intervention showed high rates of attrition among enrolled patients, even after providing cellphones. The majority of patients who were reached remained adherent to MOUD though they reported significant barriers.

Factors Affecting Initiation and Retention of Medication-Assisted Recovery (MAR) within a Pilot Pharmacist-Involved Practice Model at a Federally Qualified Healthcare Center (FQHC) during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, opioid-related overdose deaths increased. Although Medication-Assisted Treatment or Recovery (MAT or MAR) is available, initiation and retention rates vary. The goal of this study was to evaluate clinical, demographic, and Social Determinant of Health factors affecting MAR initiation, on-time initiation of medications, and successful retention in the program. The secondary goal was to evaluate the impact of a novel interprofessional practice model incorporating pharmacists. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using electronic health record data from a pilot MAR Program initiated within a California Federally Qualified Healthcare Center. RESULTS: From September 2019 to August 2020, 48 patients enrolled into the program. On-time initiation of medications occurred in 68% of patients and average program retention was 96.4 ± 95.8 days. Patients currently using opioids (p = 0.005) and those receiving supportive medications (p = 0.049) had lower odds of on-time MAR initiation. There were no statistically significant factors associated with successful retention in the program. The number of visits with members of the interprofessional team did not significantly affect on-time initiation or successful retention. CONCLUSIONS: Current opioid use and receipt of supportive medications were associated with lower on-time medication initiation. Further studies are warranted to explore additional factors which may affect initiation and retention.

Lessening the Impact of Opioid Misuse at a Federally Qualified Health Center in New York: Outcomes of an Integrated Workforce Training Program.

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed an unprecedented burden on patients, health care providers, and communities and has been particularly challenging for medically underserved populations impacted by the social determinants of health, as well as people with co-occurring mental health and substance use risks. This case study examines outcomes and lessons learned from a multisite low-threshold medication-assisted treatment (MAT) program at a federally qualified health center in partnership with a large suburban public university in New York to integrate and train Health Resources & Services Administration Behavioral Health Workforce Education and Training-funded graduate student trainees in social work and nursing in screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment and patient care coordination, including social determinants of health and medical and behavioral comorbidities. The MAT program for the treatment of opioid use disorder has a low threshold for entry that is accessible and affordable, reduces barriers to care, and uses a harm reduction approach. Outcome data showed an average 70% retention rate in the MAT program and reductions in substance use. And, while more than 73% of patients reported being somewhat or definitely impacted by the pandemic, most patients endorsed the effectiveness of telemedicine and telebehavioral health, such that 86% indicated the pandemic did not affect the quality of their health care. The main implementation lessons learned were the importance of increasing the capacity of primary care and health care centers to deliver integrated care, using cross-disciplinary practicum experiences to enhance trainee competencies, and addressing the social determinants of health among populations with social vulnerabilities and chronic medical conditions.

The impact of the implementation of medication for opioid use disorder and COVID-19 in a statewide correctional system on treatment engagement, postrelease continuation of care, and overdose.

BACKGROUND: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are overrepresented in US correctional facilities and experience disproportionately high risk for overdose after release. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are highly efficacious but not available to most incarcerated individuals. In 2018, Vermont began providing MOUD for all incarcerated individuals with OUD statewide. In 2020, the COVID-19 state of emergency began. We assessed the impact of both events on MOUD utilization and treatment outcomes. METHODOLOGY: Analyses linked Vermont Department of Corrections administrative data and Medicaid claims data between 07/01/2017 and 03/31/2021. The study used logistic regression to analyze treatment engagement among all incarcerated individuals in Vermont. Multilevel modeling assessed change in clinical outcomes among release episodes that occurred among individuals with an OUD diagnosis Medicaid claim. RESULTS: Prescriptions for MOUD while incarcerated increased from 0.8% to 33.9% of the incarcerated population after MOUD implementation (OR = 67.4) and subsequently decreased with the onset of COVID-19 to 26.6% (OR = 0.7). After MOUD implementation, most prescriptions (63.1%) were to individuals who had not been receiving MOUD prior to incarceration, but this figure decreased to 53.9% with the onset of COVID-19 (OR = 0.7). Prescriptions for MOUD within 30 days after release increased from 33.9% of those with OUD before to 41.0% after MOUD implementation (OR = 1.4) but decreased to 35.6% with the onset of COVID-19 (OR = 0.8). Simultaneously, opioid-related nonfatal overdoses within 30 days after release decreased from 1.2% before to 0.8% after statewide MOUD implementation (OR = 0.3) but increased to 1.9% during COVID-19 (OR = 3.4). Fatal overdoses within 1 year after release decreased from 27 deaths before to ≤10 after statewide MOUD implementation and remained ≤10 during COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: This longitudinal evaluation demonstrated increased treatment engagement and a decrease in opioid-related overdose following implementation of MOUD in a statewide correctional system. In contrast, these improvements were somewhat attenuated with the onset of COVID-19, which was associated with decreased treatment engagement and an increase in nonfatal overdoses. Considered together, these findings demonstrate the benefits of statewide MOUD for incarcerated individuals as well as the need to identify and address barriers to continuation of care following release from incarceration in the context of COVID-19.

Harm reduction for problematic substance use

A harm reduction approach, as the name implies, seeks to minimize the adverse consequences of behaviors without necessarily reducing or eliminating the behavior. Harm reduction policies have been initiated for a wide range of public health challenges throughout the world, including carbon exchange programs to combat air pollution, food labels to encourage healthier eating habits, access to condoms to reduce sexually transmitted infections, and directives to minimize large social gatherings to avoid contagion during the COVID-19 pandemic. The current opioid epidemic, which in the United States claimed more than 46,000 lives in 2018 alone 2020, brought about a renewed urgency to make medication available for treating opioid use disorder. The use of agonist medications for the treatment of problematic substance use is a narrowly targeted harm reduction approach generally reserved for people with substantial opioid addiction. Social workers are employed in a vast array of settings conducive to a harm reduction approach, including schools, colleges, hospitals, child welfare services, mental health clinics, housing, and private practice. In the end, the harm reduction model neither condemns nor condones drug use, and instead concerns itself with the quality of life for individuals, community, and society. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Clinical effectiveness of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir in patients with COVID-19 and substance use disorders based on real-world data.

This study assessed the clinical efficacy of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir (NMV-r) in treating patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and substance use disorders (SUDs). This study included two cohorts: the first examined patients with SUDs, with and without a prescription for NMV-r, while the second compared patients prescribed with NMV-r, with and without a diagnosis of SUDs. SUDs were defined using ICD-10 codes, related to SUDs, including alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, opioid, and tobacco use disorders (TUD). Patients with underlying SUDs and COVID-19 were identified using the TriNetX network. We used 1:1 propensity score matching to create balanced groups. The primary outcome of interest was the composite outcome of all-cause hospitalization or death within 30 days. Propensity score matching yielded two matched groups of 10 601 patients each. The results showed that the use of NMV-r was associated with a lower risk of hospitalization or death, 30 days after COVID-19 diagnosis (hazard ratio (HR), 0.640; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.543-0.754), as well as a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (HR, 0.699; 95% CI: 0.592-0.826) and all-cause death (HR, 0.084; 95% CI: 0.026-0.273). However, patients with SUDs had a higher risk of hospitalized or death within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis than those without SUDs, even with the use of NMV-r (HR, 1.783; 95% CI: 1.399-2.271). The study also found that patients with SUDs had a higher prevalence of comorbidities and adverse socioeconomic determinants of health than those without SUDs. Subgroup analysis showed that the benefits of NMV-r were consistent across most subgroups with different characteristics, including age (patients aged ≥60 years [HR, 0.507; 95% CI: 0.402-0.640]), sex (women [HR, 0.636; 95% CI: 0.517-0.783] and men [HR, 0.480; 95% CI: 0.373-0.618]), vaccine status (vaccinated <2 doses [HR, 0.514; 95% CI: 0.435-0.608]), SUD subtypes (alcohol use disorder [HR, 0.711; 95% CI: 0.511- 0.988], TUD [HR, 0.666; 95% CI: 0.555-0.800]) and Omicron wave (HR, 0.624; 95% CI: 0.536-0.726). Our findings indicate that NMV-r could reduce all-cause hospitalization and death in the treatment of COVID-19 among patients with SUDs and support the use of NMV-r for treating patients with SUDs and COVID-19.

Acupuncture in Addiction Medicine: Its History, Evidence, and Possibilities.

Substance-use disorders (SUDs) and drug addiction are not only national, but also global health concerns that have worsened during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Acupuncture augments the endogenous opioid system and, therefore, has a theoretical basis as a treatment for opioid use disorders (OUDs). The basic science of acupuncture, its clinical research in addiction medicine, and decades of success of the National Acupuncture Detoxification Association protocol offer positive findings supporting this protocol's utility for treating SUDs. Considering the mounting opioid/substance-use concerns and deficiencies in SUD treatment availability in the United States, acupuncture can be a safe, feasible treatment option and adjunct in addiction medicine. Furthermore, large governmental agencies are lending support to acupuncture for treating acute and chronic pain, which, in turn, could translate to prevention of SUDs and addictions. This article is a narrative review of the background, the basic science and clinical research, and future direction of acupuncture in addiction medicine.

Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on enrollment in medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in Vancouver, Canada: An interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: In anticipation of COVID-19 related disruptions to opioid use disorder (OUD) care, new provincial and federal guidance for the management of OUD and risk mitigation guidance (RMG) for prescription of pharmaceutical opioids were introduced in British Columbia, Canada, in March 2020. This study evaluated the combined impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and counteracting OUD policies on enrollment in medications for OUD (MOUD). METHODS: Using data from three cohorts of people with presumed OUD in Vancouver, we conducted an interrupted time series analysis to estimate the combined effects impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and counteracting OUD policies on the prevalence of enrollment in MOUD overall, as well as in individual MOUDs (methadone, buprenorphine/naloxone, slow-release oral morphine) between November 2018 and November 2021, controlling for pre-existing trends. In sub-analysis we considered RMG opioids together with MOUD. RESULTS: We included 760 participants with presumed OUD. In the post-COVID-19 period, MOUD and slow-release oral morphine prevalence rates showed an estimated immediate increase in level (+7.6%, 95% CI: 0.6%, 14.6% and 1.8%, 95% CI: 0.3%, 3.3%, respectively), followed by a decline in the monthly trend (-0.8% per month, 95% CI: -1.4%, -0.2% and -0.2% per month, 95% CI: -0.4, -0.1, respectively). There were no significant changes in the prevalence trends of enrollment in methadone, buprenorphine/naloxone, or when RMG opioids were considered together with MOUD. CONCLUSIONS: Despite immediate improvements in MOUD enrollment in the post-COVID-19 period, this beneficial trend reversed over time. RMG opioids appeared to have provided additional benefits to sustain retention in OUD care.

Opioid Policy Changes During the COVID-19 Pandemic - and Beyond

The United States is currently in the midst of 2 public health emergencies: COVID-19 and the ongoing opioid crisis. In an attempt to reduce preventable harm to individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD), federal, state, and local governments have temporarily modified law and policy to increase access to OUD treatment and divert some individuals at high risk away from the correctional system. In this Commentary, we briefly describe how people with OUD are at increased risk for COVID-19, discuss existing policy barriers to evidence-based prevention and treatment for individuals with OUD, explain the temporary rollbacks of those barriers, and argue that these changes should be made permanent. We also suggest several additional steps that federal and state governments can urgently take to reduce barriers to care for individuals with OUD, both during the current crisis and beyond. Copyright © 2020 American Society of Addiction Medicine.

Advancing emergency department-initiated buprenorphine.

Opioids are the main driver of drug overdose deaths in the United States, and there has been a marked increase in opioid-related overdoses during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Many emergency departments (EDs) across the country are implementing ED-initiated buprenorphine programs, and this is a method to address and prevent opioid overdoses. Resources are available to overcome barriers and take action.

Use of Telehealth for Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in Safety Net Primary Care Settings: A Mixed-Methods Study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a marked increase in telehealth for the provision of primary care-based opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. This mixed methods study examines characteristics associated with having the majority of OUD-related visits via telehealth versus in-person, and changes in mode of delivery (in-person, telephone, video) over time. Methods: Logistic regression was performed using electronic health record data from patients with ≥1 visit with an OUD diagnosis to ≥1 of the two study clinics (Rural Health Clinic; urban Federally Qualified Health Center) and ≥1 OUD medication ordered from 3/8/2020-9/1/2021, with >50% of OUD visits via telehealth (vs. >50% in-person) as the dependent variable and patient characteristics as independent variables. Changes in visit type over time were also examined. Inductive coding was used to analyze data from interviews with clinical team members (n = 10) who provide OUD care to understand decision-making around visit type. Results: New patients (vs. returning; OR = 0.47;95%CI:0.27-0.83), those with ≥1 psychiatric diagnosis (vs. none; OR = 0.49,95%CI:0.29-0.82), and rural clinic patients (vs. urban; OR = 0.05; 95%CI:0.03-0.08) had lower odds of having the majority of visits via telehealth than in-person. Patterns of visit type varied over time by clinic, with the majority of telehealth visits delivered via telephone. Team members described flexibility for patients as a key telehealth benefit, but described in-person visits as more conducive to building rapport with new patients and those with increased psychological burden. Conclusion: Understanding how and why telehealth is used for OUD treatment is critical for ensuring access to care and informing OUD-related policy decisions.

A scoping literature review of pharmacy-based opioid misuse screening and brief interventions.

BACKGROUND: Although prescription opioid dispensing rates have continued to decrease, overdose deaths involving prescription opioids have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Screening and brief interventions (SBI) are an effective prevention strategy to identify and address opioid misuse and safety risks. Emerging literature on pharmacy-based SBI needs to be systematically appraised to develop robust interventions. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to conduct a scoping review of the literature regarding pharmacy-based opioid misuse SBI to identify relevant literature that explore the topic, evaluate the patient-centeredness of included studies, and explore the use of dissemination and implementation science in the literature. METHODS: The review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses -Scoping reviews (PRISMA-Sc) guidelines. We searched PubMed, CINHAL, PsychInfo, and Scopus for studies regarding pharmacy-based SBI, published in the last 20 years. We also conducted a separate grey literature search. Two of three total reviewers screened each abstract individually and identified eligible full-texts for inclusion. We critically appraised quality of included studies and qualitatively synthesized the relevant information. RESULTS: The search resulted in 21 studies (categorized as intervention, descriptive, and observational research) and 3 grey literature reports. Of the recently published 21 studies, 11 were observational research, with six interventions in the pilot stages. Screening tools varied but naloxone was the brief intervention in 15 of the 24 results. Only eight studies had high validity, reliability, and applicability and only five were patient-centered. Implementation science principles were addressed in eight studies (mainly interventions). Overall, the findings suggest high potential for evidence-based SBI to be successful. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the review suggested a strong lack of a patient-centered and implementation science-focused approach to designing pharmacy-based opioid misuse SBI. Findings suggest that a patient-centered, implementation focused approach is needed for effective and sustained pharmacy-based opioid misuse SBI.

Impact of VA's video telehealth tablets on substance use disorder care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth has the potential to improve health care access for patients but it has been underused and understudied for examining patients with substance use disorders (SUD). VA began distributing video-enabled tablets to veterans with access barriers in 2016 to facilitate participation in home-based telehealth and expanded this program in 2020 due to the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: Examine the impact of VA's video-enabled telehealth tablets on mental health services for patients diagnosed with SUD. METHODS: This study included VA patients who had ≥1 mental health visit in the calendar year 2019 and a documented diagnosis of SUD. Using difference-in-differences and event study designs, we compared outcomes for SUD-diagnosed patients who received a video-enabled tablet from VA between March 15th, 2020 and December 31st, 2021 and SUD-diagnosed patients who never received VA tablets, 10 months before and after tablet-issuance. Outcomes included monthly frequency of SUD psychotherapy visits, SUD specialty group therapy visits and SUD specialty individual outpatient visits. We examined changes in video visits and changes in visits across all modalities of care (video, phone, and in-person). Regression models adjusted for several covariates such as age, sex, rurality, race, ethnicity, physical and mental health chronic conditions, and broadband coverage in patients' residential zip-code. RESULTS: The cohort included 21,684 SUD-diagnosed tablet-recipients and 267,873 SUD-diagnosed non-recipients. VA's video-enabled tablets were associated with increases in video visits for SUD psychotherapy (+3.5 visits/year), SUD group therapy (+2.1 visits/year) and SUD individual outpatient visits (+1 visit/year), translating to increases in visits across all modalities (in-person, phone and video): increase of 18 % for SUD psychotherapy (+1.9 visits/year), 10 % for SUD specialty group therapy (+0.5 visit/year), and 4 % for SUD specialty individual outpatient treatment (+0.5 visit/year). CONCLUSIONS: VA's distribution of video-enabled tablets during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with higher engagement with video-based services for SUD care among patients diagnosed with SUD, translating to modest increases in total visits across in-person, phone and video modalities. Distribution of video-enabled devices can offer patients critical continuity of SUD therapy, particularly in scenarios where they have heightened barriers to in-person care.

Acceptability of a Fentanyl Vaccine to Prevent Opioid Overdose and Need for Personalized Decision-Making.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic worsened during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Synthetic opioids (primarily fentanyl) comprise the most common drugs involved in overdose (OD) death. A vaccine that blocks fentanyl from reaching the brain to prevent OD is under development, and insight is needed into its acceptability. METHODS: Using a semi-structured interview guide, persons with opioid use disorder (OUD), family, professionals, and the public were interviewed about attitudes and concerns regarding a fentanyl vaccine. Reactions to fictional clinical vignettes of persons at risk of OUD because of pain and/or substance use histories were collected, analyzed, and quantified for favorability. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Among N = 64 participants, (70.3% female, average age 32.4 years), attitudes were favorable toward a fentanyl vaccine, with preference for lifelong durability (76% of n = 55 asked). Perceived benefits centered on the potential for a life-saving intervention, suffering averted, healthcare dollars saved, and the utility of a passive harm reduction strategy. Concerns centered on uncertainty regarding vaccine safety, questions about efficacy, worry about implications for future pain management, stigma, and need for supportive counseling and guidance to personalize decision making. Reactions to vignettes revealed complex attitudes toward fentanyl vaccination when considering recipient age, health history, and future risks for addiction and pain. CONCLUSIONS: Positive responses to a fentanyl vaccine were found along with appreciation for the complexity of a vaccine strategy to prevent OD in the setting of pain and uncertain durability. Further research is needed to elucidate operational, ethical, and communications strategies to advance the model.

An exploratory study of a hands-on naloxone training for rural clinicians and staff.

INTRODUCTION: Since the COVID-19 pandemic, an increase in fentanyl-combined drugs has led to a surge in opioid overdose deaths in the United States. Higher opioid overdose mortality rates are problematic in rural communities, and there are few prevention, treatment, and recovery resources for individuals experiencing opioid use disorder. METHOD: This exploratory project aimed to investigate a hands-on naloxone training for rural clinicians and staff. Rural clinicians and staff at two behavioral health centers were recruited to participate in a 30-min lecture and 30-min hands-on intranasal naloxone training using a low-fidelity mannequin. A pre-post opioid knowledge questionnaire, rubric based on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration toolkit, and investigator-generated survey were used to evaluate opioid knowledge and response, demonstration of intranasal naloxone administration, and participants' perceptions of the training. Enrollment characteristics were summarized using descriptive statistics and paired t-tests were used to assess mean differences. RESULTS: Of the nine participants in the project, seven (87.5%) were female and six (75.0%) were Black. Four participants assumed a therapist role, attained a MS or MA degree, and had 5 or more years of experience working in healthcare. The total mean rubric score for all participants was 96.0 (SD = 8.8). No significant pre-post mean differences among opioid knowledge, overdose risk, and overdose response categories were found, all p > 0.05. However, post-intervention mean scores were slightly higher in all categories except overdose risk. Most participants (77.8%) responded that they felt comfortable handling an opioid situation and teaching the training to community members. Open-ended responses indicated that participants liked the demonstrations, examples used, hands-on nature of the training, and the presentation materials. CONCLUSION: A hands-on naloxone training is beneficial for training rural clinicians and staff to respond to opioid overdose. This training may be a promising solution to reduce response time between recognition of opioid symptoms and administration of the life-saving medication, naloxone. Future studies should examine the efficacy of this training in larger samples with the inclusion of rural interdisciplinary teams, trusted community leaders, and family and friends of those impacted by opioid use disorder. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This innovative hands-on naloxone training is designed for rural clinicians and residents who are most likely to witness individuals experiencing opioid toxicity. The primary goal is to reduce response time between recognition of signs and symptoms and administration of the life-saving medication, Naloxone.

Rural communities face more than an opioid crisis: Reimagining funding assistance to address polysubstance use, associated health problems, and limited rural service capacity.

PURPOSE: Rural communities in the United States face unique challenges related to the opioid epidemic. This paper explores the substances and substance-related health problems that pose the greatest concern to rural communities that received funding to address the opioid epidemic and examines their reported capacity to address these challenges. METHODS: This paper analyzed data collected as part of quarterly progress reporting from multisector consortiums across 2 cohorts of grantees funded to reduce the morbidity and mortality of opioids. Consortium project directors ranked the top 3 issues in their community in each of the following categories: (1) drugs of concern; (2) drugs with the least capacity to address; (3) related problem areas of concern (eg, neonatal abstinence syndrome [NAS]); and (4) related problem areas with the least capacity to address. FINDINGS: Methamphetamines, fentanyl, and alcohol were the substances rated as most problematic in rural communities funded to address the opioid epidemic across all reporting periods. Over 40% of respondents ranked methamphetamine as a top concern and the substance they had the least capacity to address. This was nearly double the percentage of the next highest-ranked substance (fentanyl). Overdoses, NAS, and viral hepatitis constituted the top-ranking related concerns, with limited capacity to address them. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple drug and concomitant problems coalesced on rural communities during the opioid epidemic. Funding communities to address substance use disorders and related problems of concern, rather than targeting funding toward a specific type of drug, may result in better health outcomes throughout the entire community.

The opioid epidemic.

An opioid epidemic has been happening across the world since the 1990s and continues impact individuals, families, communities and societies around the globe. The epidemic has evolved from heroin misuse to the use of synthetic opioids that are easily manufactured and are readily available. Reasons for the continuing opioid epidemic are complex, and include factors related to mental health, addiction, chronic pain relief, and, now, the COVID-19 pandemic. Women have been disproportionally affected by the opioid epidemic and the physical and biosocial effects of opioid use specific to women are an important consideration for healthcare providers. Recent data show that the effects of the opioid epidemic on rates of opioid use disorder (OUD), overdoses, and the economy continue to rise, despite global efforts to understand the drivers and develop effective prevention and intervention strategies, programs, and policies.

County-level variation in synthetic opioid and heroin overdose incidents in Pennsylvania during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objective: Evaluate differences in synthetic opioid overdose rates, including semi-synthetic heroin, by individual demographic (N = 14,665) and county-level (N = 67) characteristics in Pennsylvania between 2018 and 2020, and before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: We used the 2018–2021 Pennsylvania Opioid Overdose Information Network data, which include information on overdose incidents in Pennsylvania that require emergency response. We performed multilevel negative binomial regressions to measure individual and county-level differences in overdose rates, controlling for differences by year. Results: At the state level, there were no significant changes in overdose incident rates by year, but 11 counties experienced significant rate increases 2018-19 to 2020-21. Black individuals demonstrated a nine times higher incident rate than White individuals. Additionally, people living in counties with higher educational attainment, higher poverty, and higher population density had lower overdose incident rates than their counterparts. Conclusions: The synthetic opioid overdose rate has accelerated since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, but this trend varies across counties. Particular attention should be paid to the counties with significant increases since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, and more local and regional analyses are required to understand community needs in the face of the ongoing opioid epidemic. © 2023 Elsevier Ltd