Kratom as a potential substance use disorder harm reduction agent.

Substance use disorders contribute to considerable U.S. morbidity and mortality. While effective pharmacotherapy options are available to treat opioid and alcohol use disorders, for a variety of reasons, many patients lack access to treatment or may be reluctant to seek care due to concerns such as perceived stigma or a current lack of desire to completely curtail their substance use. Furthermore, treatment options are limited for patients with stimulant or polysubstance use disorders. Thus, there is considerable need to expand the substance use disorder harm reduction armamentarium. Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa Korth.) is an herbal substance that can produce both opioid and stimulant-like effects, and its use in the US is growing. Though there are concerns regarding adverse effects, dependence risk, and limited regulation of its manufacturing and sale, the pharmacology of kratom and early preclinical studies suggest a potential role as a harm reduction agent for various substance use disorders, and it has historically been used in Southeast Asia for such purposes. The goal of this review is to describe kratom's history of use, pharmacology, and early pre-clinical and observational research regarding its therapeutic potential in opioid use disorder, as well as alcohol, stimulant, and polysubstance use disorders, while also highlighting current concerns around its use, existing gaps in the literature, and directions for future research.

Association of Gabapentinoids With Opioid-Related Overdose in the Inpatient Setting: A Single Center Retrospective Case-Control Study.

Objectives: Recent data suggest concomitant gabapentinoid use increases opioid-related overdose (ORO) risk; however, this association has not been well studied in the hospital setting. The primary objective of this study was to compare ORO risk, indicated by naloxone administration, in patients receiving opioids plus gabapentinoids versus opioids alone. Methods: In this retrospective case-control study of adults admitted to a large community hospital from 1/1/20 to 12/31/21, all cases (defined as patients who received naloxone more than 24 hours after admission) identified were matched 1:1 to randomly selected controls (defined as patients on opioids who did not receive naloxone). The primary outcome was the percentage of cases and controls with concomitant inpatient gabapentinoid use. Logistic regression was performed to determine the independent association between gabapentinoids and ORO (as evidenced by inpatient naloxone administration). Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the 144 cases and 144 controls. Gabapentinoid exposure was greater for cases than controls (34.0%vs 20.8%, P = .0118). Median hospital length of stay (11vs 4 days, P < .0001) and mortality (19%vs 5%; P = .0018) were also higher for cases. In logistic regression analysis, ORO (adjusted OR 4.91; 95% CI 1.86-12.96) and serotonergic medication exposure (adjusted OR 4.31; 95% CI 1.50-12.38) were significantly associated with gabapentinoid use. Conclusions: Concomitant gabapentinoid use with opioids was associated with increased ORO risk in the inpatient setting. When considering prescribing gabapentinoids in conjunction with opioids in the hospital setting, potential benefits should be weighed against increased overdose risk.

Quetiapine and olanzapine misuse prevalence in a US general population sample.

Introduction: Second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) are associated with misuse potential; however, there are limited data describing the prevalence and characteristics of this misuse. This study was conducted to identify and describe quetiapine and olanzapine misuse among US adults. Methods: This cross-sectional survey questionnaire was conducted online using Qualtrics research panel aggregator service to identify a quota-based sample of respondents constructed to mimic the general US population aged 18 to 59 years, with regards to gender, geographic region, ethnicity, income, and education level. Misuse was defined as using quetiapine or olanzapine for treatment outside of medical recommendations, for reasons other than a diagnosed medical condition, or obtaining without a prescription. A logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with SGA misuse, incorporating relevant covariates. Results: Among 1843 total respondents, 229 had a history of quetiapine or olanzapine use. Misuse prevalence was estimated to be 6.3% (95% CI: 5.2, 7.5%). Although most respondents (∼70%) using quetiapine or olanzapine reported doing so to treat a diagnosed medical condition, those misusing them most commonly did so because prescribed medications failed to relieve their symptoms. Misuse was commonly reported (∼50%) concomitantly with opioids, benzodiazepines, or alcohol. Factors significantly associated with quetiapine or olanzapine misuse included employment (OR = 4.64), previous substance use disorder treatment (OR = 2.48), and having riskier attitudes toward medication misuse (OR = 1.23). Discussion: Misuse of quetiapine and olanzapine, while fairly limited in prevalence, appears to be primarily associated with under-treatment of existing medical conditions.

Pharmacist, prescriber, and drug policy expert opinions on gabapentinoid misuse.

BACKGROUND: Gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) are widely used in clinical practice, but recent evidence indicates that they carry an increased risk of misuse. As healthcare professionals (HCPs) and policymakers plan different strategies to promote harm reduction, it is important to understand different interested party viewpoints. OBJECTIVE: To explore prescriber, pharmacist, and drug policy expert (DPE) awareness, opinions, and experiences regarding gabapentinoid misuse. METHODS: A qualitative description study using individual semi-structured virtual interviews was conducted between February and April 2021. Participants included prescribers (physicians, physician assistants [PA], or nurse practitioners [NP]) and pharmacists practicing in outpatient, ambulatory, or community-based healthcare settings; individuals with relevant drug policy expertise were also included. Qualtrics (Provo, Utah) and Zoom (San Jose, California) were used to facilitate quantitative (for initial screening and participant characteristics) and qualitative (interview) data collection. Data were coded and organized into themes in NVivo (QSR International; Burlington, Massachusetts) using thematic analysis steps. RESULTS: A total of 43 individuals participated in this study, including 16 (37.2%) pharmacists, 13 (30.2%) physicians, seven (16.3%) NPs, four (9.3%) DPEs, two (4.7%) pharmacist/DPEs, and one (2.3%) PA. Results were organized along four themes: (1) challenges/opportunities in gabapentinoid use; (2) gabapentinoid misuse awareness; (3) solutions to gabapentinoid misuse and (4) contributing barriers in pain management. Participants invoked different opinions in their consideration of gabapentinoid misuse, including the desire for harm reduction, the limitations of the current healthcare and insurance system, the lack of options for pain and substance use disorder treatment, and the influence of patient expectations. CONCLUSIONS: Gabapentinoid misuse was commonly framed in comparative fashion to ongoing concerns with opioids, and proposed solutions often focused less on regulatory control and more toward patient and HCP education and an overhaul of the health system approach to substance use and healthcare overall.

Community pharmacists' counseling regarding nicotine replacement therapy: A secret shopper study.

BACKGROUND: Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is a safe and effective non-prescription tobacco cessation treatment. While most community-based pharmacists periodically provide patient education regarding NRT, there is a gap in real-world evidence assessing the counseling provided. OBJECTIVES: To assess community pharmacist counseling regarding NRT in a real-world setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional secret shopper audit was conducted to collect data regarding NRT counseling from 120 community pharmacist encounters. Seventeen trained college of pharmacy students presented to community pharmacies using a standardized script asking about 1 of 3 common NRT products (patch, gum, and lozenge). Pharmacies were randomly selected from a list of all community pharmacies open to the public in Bexar County, Texas. A standardized assessment form was used to document product availability, counseling length, whether or not the 7 counseling points and 6 assessment questions that could help guide the pharmacist's counseling regarding NRT products were provided without prompting, and potential inaccuracy of any recommendations and counseling points. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and analysis of variance and Fisher's exact test were used to test for variation across site type and time of day. RESULTS: NRT was available for purchase without speaking to pharmacy staff in 99 of 120 (83%) pharmacies. The mean length of counseling was 136 (standard deviation = 91) seconds. The most common points discussed were recommended strength (72%), tapering schedule (58%), and assessment of the daily number of cigarettes smoked (56%). Forty-one (34%) pharmacists provided one or more potentially inaccurate counseling points, the most common being inaccurate tapering schedule (provided during 31 (26%) encounters). Only 15% of pharmacists referred auditors for additional help or recommended a follow-up. CONCLUSION: NRT was commonly accessible in community pharmacies outside of the pharmacy area. Opportunities for pharmacists to provide more complete and accurate information to better assist patients with safe and effective smoking cessation were identified.

Naloxone accessibility without an outside prescription from U.S. community pharmacies: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence has identified limited naloxone accessibility in community pharmacies. OBJECTIVES: To summarize current literature regarding naloxone accessibility without an outside prescription from U.S. community pharmacies and discuss implications on community pharmacists' ability to mitigate the opioid overdose epidemic. METHODS: A systematic review was developed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed was searched up to May 12, 2022. References from articles chosen for inclusion were subsequently reviewed to identify additional relevant studies. Peer-reviewed publications reporting new data regarding the accessibility of naloxone from U.S. community pharmacies without an outside prescription (e.g., standing order, protocol) were included. Review articles and articles written in a non-English language were excluded. Individual study data were reported, along with a qualitative discussion of limitations of individual studies and in aggregate. When possible, naloxone accessibility data were also pooled and reported as overall accessibility and further stratified by chain versus independent pharmacies and urban versus rural settings. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included. Naloxone was in stock in 6867 of 10,934 (62.8%) pharmacies, though this varied greatly between studies (range, 26.4%-96.1%). Chain pharmacies were more likely to stock naloxone than independents (69.7% [range, 35.4%-89.1%] vs. 36.4% [range, 19.1%-89.7%], P < 0.0001). Stocking did not significantly differ between urban and rural locations. A total of 5660 of 8999 (62.9%; range, 23.5%-97%) pharmacies audited were willing to dispense without a prescription, with chain (67.4% vs. 22.2%, P < 0.0001) and rural (69.3% vs. 40.7%, P < 0.0001) pharmacies more likely than independent and urban, respectively. Key access barriers identified included naloxone not stocked, high naloxone cost, and pharmacist misinformation or stigma. CONCLUSION: Though limited by study heterogeneity, analysis of thirty U.S. studies revealed naloxone was available without a prescription in less than two-thirds of community pharmacies. Availability varied significantly by study and pharmacy type.

Outpatient Opioid and Naloxone Prescribing Practices at an Academic Medical Center during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

While improving opioid safety has been a national priority, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been associated with increased rates of opioid overdose. The present study characterized outpatient opioid and naloxone prescribing patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic. A retrospective chart review was conducted of adult patients receiving opioid therapy between August 2020 through October 2020 from outpatient clinics within a Texas health system. The primary outcome was naloxone co-prescription during the study period or within the year prior. During the study period, 1,368 patients received an opioid prescription, most of which were prescribed for chronic pain treatment (63.0%). Most opioid prescriptions (91.5%) were written for < 50 MME/day. For prescriptions written for acute pain, 78% were written for ≤ 10 days supply. While 31.1% of patients received gabapentinoid prescriptions, few (7.9%) received benzodiazepine or Z-hypnotic prescriptions. Twenty-two (1.6%) patients were co-prescribed naloxone. In this study, naloxone was rarely prescribed for outpatients receiving opioid prescriptions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health systems should continue to prioritize adherence to evidence-based clinical guidelines and increase access to naloxone.

Retrospective Cohort Evaluating the Comparative Effectiveness of Ceftaroline and Daptomycin as First-Line Therapies for Inpatient Treatment of Diabetic Foot Infection in the United States Veterans Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: Both ceftaroline and daptomycin are possible therapeutic options for diabetic foot infection (DFI) and both are active against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection; however, no previous studies have evaluated their effectiveness head-to-head. OBJECTIVE: This study compared hospital readmission and mortality proportions among patients receiving ceftaroline fosamil or daptomycin for DFI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort, comparative effectiveness study of adults (aged ≥ 18 years) admitted to United States Veterans Health Care System hospitals with a diagnosis code for DFI between 1 October 2010 and 30 September 2014 with an electronic order for ceftaroline or daptomycin as first-line therapy within 14 days of admission. Baseline characteristics were compared using Chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Hospital readmission and patient mortality proportions were compared through multivariable logistic regression models with Hispanic ethnicity, prior hospitalization, dyslipidemia, and Charlson comorbidity score as covariates. RESULTS: In total, 223 patients were included (ceftaroline, n = 71; daptomycin n = 152). At baseline, ceftaroline patients were more likely to be Hispanic (18 vs. 6%, p < 0.01) and have been hospitalized in the past 90 days (34 vs. 19%, p = 0.02). Unadjusted 90-day hospital readmission proportions for ceftaroline versus daptomycin were 34 vs. 49%, and unadjusted 90-day mortality proportions were 1% vs. 8%. In multivariable models, ceftaroline patients were less likely to experience 90-day hospital readmission (odds ratio [OR] 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.85) and 90-day mortality (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01-0.77). CONCLUSIONS: In this population, ceftaroline was associated with lower 90-day hospital readmission and 90-day mortality compared with daptomycin when used as first-line therapy for DFI.

Availability of buprenorphine/naloxone films and naloxone nasal spray in community pharmacies in 11 U.S. states.

BACKGROUND: Prompt access to prescribed buprenorphine/naloxone films (BUP/NX) and naloxone nasal spray (NNS) is vital for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), but multiple studies have documented pharmacy-level barriers. METHODS: A cross-sectional secret shopper telephone audit was conducted in a sample of 5734 actively licensed pharmacies in 11 U.S. states from May 2020-April 2021. Primary outcomes included availability of 14 generic BUP/NX 8/2 mg and one unit of NNS 4 mg. Outcomes were compared by pharmacy type, county metropolitan status, state Medicaid expansion status, and state drug overdose death rate. RESULTS: Data from 4984 pharmacies (3402 chain and 1582 independent) were analyzed. Both medications were available in 41.2 % of pharmacies, BUP/NX was available in 48.3%, and NNS was available in 69.5%. Chain pharmacies were significantly more likely than independent pharmacies to have both medications available, to have each medication available individually, and to be willing to order BUP/NX. Pharmacies in metropolitan counties were more likely to have BUP/NX available than pharmacies in non-metropolitan counties, pharmacies in Medicaid expansion states were more likely to have both medications available and to have NNS available than pharmacies in non-expansion states, and pharmacies in states with high drug overdose death rates were more likely to have NNS available than pharmacies in states with low drug overdose death rates. CONCLUSIONS: BUP/NX and NNS are not readily accessible in many U.S. pharmacies. Deficits in access are most pronounced in independent pharmacies, though county- and state-level factors may also influence availability of these essential medications.

Gabapentinoid Pharmacology in the Context of Emerging Misuse Liability.

This article will review the epidemiology and pharmacology of gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) relevant to their emerging misuse potential and provide guidance for clinical and regulatory management. Gabapentinoids are γ-aminobutyric acid analogues that produce their therapeutic effects by inhibiting voltage-gated calcium channels and decreasing neurotransmitter release. Recently gabapentinoid prescribing and use have increased tremendously. Although traditionally thought to possess a favorable safety profile, gabapentinoid misuse has also risen significantly. Gabapentinoid misuse generally occurs in combination with other substances, most notably opioids, and may be for purposes of eliciting euphoric effects, enhancing the effects of other substances, or self-treating conditions such as withdrawal, pain, anxiety, or insomnia. Given its faster onset, increased bioavailability and potency, and nonsaturable absorption, pregabalin's pharmacokinetics theoretically enhance its misuse liability versus gabapentin. However, gabapentin can produce similar euphoric effects, and epidemiologic studies have identified higher rates of gabapentin misuse in the United States, likely because of greater availability and less regulated prescribing. Although adverse events of gabapentinoid-only ingestion are relatively benign, a growing body of evidence indicates that gabapentinoids significantly increase opioid-related morbidity and mortality when used concomitantly. In addition, significant withdrawal effects may occur on abrupt discontinuation. As a result of these trends, several US states have begun to further regulate gabapentinoid prescribing, reclassifying it as a controlled substance or mandating reporting to local prescription drug-monitoring programs. Although increased regulation of gabapentin prescribing may be warranted, harm reduction efforts and increased patient and provider education are necessary to mitigate this concerning gabapentinoid misuse trend.

Characterization of hospitalized patients who received naloxone while receiving opioids with or without gabapentinoids.

INTRODUCTION: Gabapentin and pregabalin (gabapentinoids) can be given with opioids for opioid-sparing and adjuvant analgesic effects. In the context of certain comorbidities and high dosages, coadministration of these agents can lead to respiratory depression or oversedation, necessitating naloxone administration. METHODS: A retrospective chart review from January 2015 to December 2017 was conducted to include patients who received naloxone and opioids with or without gabapentinoids. Exclusion criteria included pregnancy or having received naloxone in the emergency department, intensive care, or pediatrics units. The primary outcome was to characterize differences between groups regarding comorbidities, history of renal or hepatic dysfunction, history of SUD, opioid tolerance, initiation and dose appropriateness of gabapentinoids, and dose intensity of gabapentinoids and opioids. Secondary outcomes were concomitant CNS depressant use and naloxone episodes for documented respiratory depression. RESULTS: Of 126 patients who met inclusion criteria, 36 received opioids and gabapentinoids (gabapentinoid group) and 90 received opioids alone (nongabapentinoid group). There were 136 naloxone episodes between the 2 groups. More than 50% of the naloxone episodes in the gabapentinoid group involved opioids of at least 90 oral morphine mg equivalents. Respiratory depression accounted for 39% and 15.8% of the naloxone episodes in the gabapentinoid and nongabapentinoid groups, respectively. DISCUSSION: There may be increased naloxone episodes among patients receiving opioids and gabapentinoids. Future studies are needed to evaluate the incremental risk of respiratory depression and oversedation as it pertains to concomitant medication administration and patient-specific factors.

Considering the Potential Benefits of Over-the-Counter Naloxone.

Since 1999, annual opioid-related overdose (ORO) mortality has increased more than six-fold. In response to this crisis, the US Department of Health and Human Services outlined a 5-point strategy to reduce ORO mortality which included the widespread distribution of naloxone, an opioid antagonist that can rapidly reverse an opioid overdose. Increased distribution has been facilitated by the implementation of naloxone access laws in each US state aimed at increasing community access to naloxone. While these laws differ from state-to-state, most contain mechanisms to enable pharmacists to dispense naloxone without a patient-specific prescription. These laws have enhanced community naloxone distribution, both from pharmacies and overdose education and naloxone distribution programs, and produced positive effects on ORO mortality. However, a growing body of evidence has revealed that significant barriers to naloxone access from pharmacies remain, and annual ORO deaths have continued to climb. Given these concerns, there has been a push among some clinicians and policymakers for the US Food and Drug Administration to re-classify naloxone as an over-the-counter (OTC) medication as a means to further increase its accessibility. If an OTC transition occurs, educational outreach and funding for clinical innovations will continue to be crucial given the important role of health professionals in recommending naloxone to people at risk for experiencing or witnessing an ORO. Recognizing the severity of the ORO public health crisis, we believe transitioning formulations of naloxone approved for layperson use to OTC status would result in a net benefit through increased access. However, such a change should be combined with measures to ensure affordability.

Prevalence of and Factors Associated with Gabapentinoid Use and Misuse Among Texas Medicaid Recipients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Gabapentin and pregabalin have been considered relatively safe opioid-sparing adjuncts for pain management. However, rising prescribing trends, presence of gabapentinoids in opioid-related overdoses, and the growing body of evidence regarding gabapentinoid misuse and abuse, have caused gabapentinoids to emerge as a drug class of public health concern. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of, and factors associated with gabapentinoid use and misuse. METHODS: This retrospective study of Texas Medicaid data from 1/1/2012 to 30/8/2016 included patients aged 18-63 years at index date, with ≥ 1 gabapentinoid prescription, and continuously enrolled 6 months pre-index and 12 months post-index. Gabapentinoid misuse was defined as ≥ 3 claims exceeding daily doses of 3600 mg for gabapentin and 600 mg for pregabalin. Age, gender, concurrent opioid use, neuropathic pain diagnoses and gabapentinoid type were independent variables. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used. RESULTS: Of included subjects (N = 39,000), 0.2% (N = 81) met study criteria for gabapentinoid misuse. Overall, the majority (76.4%) of gabapentinoid users were aged 41-63 years with a mean ± SD age of 48.2 ± 10.7 years. Those patients meeting the study criteria for gabapentinoid misuse were significantly younger (45.1 ± 11.0 vs 48.2 ± 10.7, p = 0.0084). Majority of the study sample was female (68.1%). However, a significantly higher proportion of males met the study criteria for gabapentinoid misuse compared to females (0.3% vs 0.2%, p = 0.0079). Approximately one-half (51.9%) of the study sample had neuropathic pain, and gabapentinoid misuse was significantly higher in neuropathic pain patients compared to those without neuropathic pain (0.3% vs 0.1%, p = 0.0078). Over three-quarters (77.4%) of patients were using gabapentin; however, gabapentinoid misuse was significantly higher among pregabalin users (0.4% vs 0.2%, p = 0.0003). Approximately 20% (17.3%) of gabapentinoid users had ≥ 90 days of concurrent opioid use. However, there was no significant difference in gabapentinoid misuse among patients with concurrent opioid use compared to patients without (0.3% vs 0.2%, p = 0.1440). Factors significantly associated with misuse included: male sex (odds ratio [OR] 0.486; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.313-0.756; p = 0.0013); neuropathic pain (OR 2.065; 95% CI 1.289-3.308; p = 0.0026); and pregabalin versus gabapentin use (OR 2.337, 95% CI 1.492-3.661; p = 0.0002). Concurrent opioid use was not significantly associated with gabapentinoid misuse (OR 1.542, 95% CI 0.920-2.586; p = 0.1006). CONCLUSION: Prevalence of gabapentinoid misuse was low (0.2%) among Texas Medicaid recipients. Younger age, male gender, neuropathic pain diagnosis and pregabalin use were significantly associated with higher levels of gabapentinoid misuse.

Gabapentinoid misuse, abuse and non-prescribed obtainment in a United States general population sample.

Background Reports of gabapentinoid (gabapentin and pregabalin) misuse are on the rise, but few studies have assessed this within the general US population. Objective Describe lifetime misuse/abuse/non-prescribed obtainment of gabapentinoids and descriptive characteristics associated with such actions in a US general population sample. Setting This cross-sectional questionnaire was administered online by Qualtrics® research panel aggregator via quota-based sampling. Methods Data were collected from a sample of respondents that mirrored the general US population aged 18-59 years with regards to age, geographic region, ethnicity, income, and education level, based on most recent census data. Misuse/abuse/non-prescribed obtainment was collectively defined as use of a gabapentinoid for reasons other than a diagnosed medical condition, using with the intention of altering one's state of consciousness, or obtaining without a prescription. A multivariable logistic regression model was created to predict misuse/abuse/non-prescribed obtainment of gabapentinoids, incorporating relevant covariates. Main outcome measure Proportion of sample indicating lifetime misuse/abuse/non-prescribed obtainment of gabapentinoids. Results Among 1,843 respondents, 121 (6.6%) reported gabapentinoid misuse/abuse/non-prescribed obtainment. Specifically, 2.1% (n = 39) and 1.5% (n = 27) of respondents for gabapentin and pregabalin, respectively, met study criteria for abuse. Opioids were the most common medication co-administered with gabapentinoids (among 50-70% of respondents) for misuse/abuse. Previous treatment for addiction (OR: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.32-5.14, p = 0.005) and the total attitudinal risk score (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.09-1.19, p < 0.001) were associated with gabapentinoid misuse/abuse/non-prescribed obtainment. Conclusion Among those surveyed, 6.6% reported previous gabapentinoid misuse/abuse/non-prescribed obtainment, providing one of the first estimates within a nationally distributed, US general population sample.

Stop the Bleed: An Interprofessional Community Service Learning Project Assessing the Efficacy of Pharmacist-Led Hemorrhage Control Education for Laypersons.

OBJECTIVES: Stop the Bleed (STB) is a national initiative that provides lifesaving hemorrhagic control education. In 2019, pharmacists were added as health-care personnel eligible to become STB instructors. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacist-led STB trainings for school employees in South Texas. METHODS: Pharmacist-led STB trainings were provided to teachers and staff in Laredo, Texas. The 60-min trainings included a presentation followed by hands-on practice of tourniquet application, wound-packing, and direct pressure application. Training efficacy was assessed through anonymous pre- and postevent surveys, which evaluated changes in knowledge, comfort level, and willingness to assist in hemorrhage control interventions. Student volunteers (predominantly pharmacy and medical students) assisted in leading the hands-on portion, providing a unique interprofessional learning opportunity. RESULTS: Participants with previous training (N = 98) were excluded, resulting in a final cohort of 437 (response rate 87.4%). Compared with baseline, comfort level using tourniquets (mean, 3.17/5 vs 4.20/5; P < 0.0001), opinion regarding tourniquet safety (2.59/3 vs 2.94/3; P < 0.0001), and knowledge regarding tourniquets (70.86/100 vs 75.84/100; P < 0.0001) and proper tourniquet placement (2.40/4 vs 3.15/4; P < 0.0001) significantly improved. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist-led STB trainings are efficacious in increasing school worker knowledge and willingness to respond in an emergency hemorrhagic situation.

Abuse and Misuse of Pregabalin and Gabapentin: A Systematic Review Update.

BACKGROUND: A 2017 systematic review (SR) identified 59 studies examining gabapentinoid (pregabalin and gabapentin) misuse/abuse. Evidence of gabapentinoid misuse/abuse has since grown substantially. OBJECTIVE: Update previous SR and describe new insights regarding gabapentinoid abuse. METHODS: A SR of PubMed was conducted to identify studies published from 7/29/2016-8/31/2020. Four searches were performed using the following terms: "gabapentin [MeSH] OR pregabalin [MeSH] OR gabapentinoid" AND one of the following substance misuse/abuse-related terms: "substance-related disorders [MeSH]", "overdose", "abuse", or "misuse". Clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane Library database were searched to identify ongoing studies or similar SRs. Reference lists of included studies were reviewed to identify additional literature. All studies with novel data related to pregabalin and/or gabapentin abuse, misuse, or overdose conducted during the study period were included. Articles not written in English, review articles, and animal studies were excluded. RESULTS: Fifty-five studies were included (29 [52.7%] from North America, 17 [30.9%] Europe, 6 [10.9%] Asia, and 3 [5.5%] Australia). Forty-six observational studies and 10 case reports/series were included (one manuscript included both). Twenty (36.4%) studied gabapentin only, 18 (32.7%) pregabalin only, and 17 (30.9%) both pregabalin/gabapentin. These studies corroborate findings from the previous SR that gabapentinoids are increasingly abused or misused to self-medicate, that gabapentinoids can produce desirable effects alone but are often used concomitantly with other drugs, and that opioid use disorder is the greatest risk factor for gabapentinoid abuse. While the original SR identified the largest studies having been published in Europe, this review identified several more generalisable US studies that have subsequently been conducted. The most concerning finding was increased evidence of associated patient harm, including increased hospital utilisation and opioid-related overdose mortality risk. CONCLUSION: Evidence suggests that gabapentinoid misuse/abuse represents a growing trend that is causing significant patient harm. Prescribers should exercise appropriate caution with use in high-risk populations and monitor for signs of misuse or abuse.

Pharmacist counseling when dispensing naloxone by standing order: A secret shopper study of 4 chain pharmacies.

BACKGROUND: Texas has passed legislation to increase access to naloxone, the opioid overdose antidote, allowing pharmacists to dispense by standing order without an outside prescription. Given this added responsibility, there is a need to assess real-world counseling provided by pharmacists when dispensing naloxone. OBJECTIVES: Assess naloxone accessibility and counseling provided by community pharmacists when dispensing naloxone by standing order. METHODS: A total of 11 student pharmacists (mean age 25 years; 63.6% female; primarily Hispanic [36.4%], Asian [27.3%], and white [27.3%]) audited community pharmacies by presenting to purchase naloxone. Variables included naloxone availability and price, counseling duration, and whether 13 predetermined counseling points were provided unprompted. Shoppers were prepared with a background story if asked so that each answered questions consistently. All shoppers participated in two 1-hour training sessions, including verification of their ability to accurately assess naloxone counseling. Pharmacies in Bexar County, TX were selected randomly from 4 pharmacy chains, each of which have implemented statewide standing orders within their chain. Descriptive statistics were calculated. A Fisher exact test and linear mixed-effects regression model were used to assess variation across chains in whether naloxone was dispensed and the mean total number of counseling points provided, respectively. RESULTS: The shoppers audited 45 pharmacies. Naloxone was dispensed in 31 of 45 (68.9%) encounters (mean cost: $129.59). The mean counseling duration was 89 seconds. The most common counseling points included: administration technique (24 of 31), readministration of second dose (22 of 31), and calling 9-1-1 (20 of 31). All other points were included in less than one-third of pharmacists' counseling. Across the 4 chains, there was significant variation in naloxone dispensing and the number of counseling points provided. CONCLUSION: Secret shoppers were unable to access naloxone from nearly one-third of pharmacies. Counseling often excluded concepts pertinent to patient safety and effectiveness, suggesting opportunities remain to promote consistent, high-quality naloxone counseling in community pharmacies.