ABSTRACT
AIMS: To explore healthcare professionals' perceptions and experiences of take-home naloxone initiatives in acute care settings to gain an understanding of issues facilitating or impeding dispensing. DESIGN: Systematic literature review. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane, MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched from 15/03/2021 to 18/03/2021, with a follow-up search performed via PubMed on 22/03/2021. The years 2011 to 2021 were included in the search. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic literature review focused on qualitative studies and quantitative survey designs. Synthesis without meta-analysis was undertaken using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Seven articles from the United States of America (5), Australia (1) and Canada (1) with 750 participants were included in the review. Results indicate ongoing stigma towards people who use drugs with preconceived moral concerns regarding take-home naloxone. There was confusion regarding roles and responsibilities in take-home naloxone dispensing and patient education. Similarly, there was a lack of clarity over logistical and financial issues. CONCLUSION: Take-home naloxone is a vital harm reduction initiative. However, barriers exist that prevent the optimum implementation of these initiatives. IMPACT: What is already known: Deaths due to opioid overdose are a global health concern, with take-home naloxone emerging as a key harm reduction scheme. Globally, less than 10% of people who use drugs have access to treatment initiatives, including take-home naloxone. An optimum point of distribution of take-home naloxone is post-acute hospital care. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: There is role confusion regarding responsibility for the provision of take-home naloxone and patient education. This is exacerbated by inconsistent provision of training and education for healthcare professionals. Logistical or financial concerns are common and moral issues are prevalent with some healthcare professionals questioning the ethics of providing take-home naloxone. Stigma towards people who use drugs remains evident in some acute care areas which may impact the use of this intervention. Implications for practice/policy: Further primary research should examine what training and education methods are effective in improving the distribution of take-home naloxone in acute care. Education should focus on reduction of stigma towards people who use drugs to improve the distribution of take-home naloxone. Standardized care guidelines may ensure interventions are offered equally and take-home naloxone 'champions' could drive initiatives forward, with support from harm reduction specialists. REPORTING METHOD: This has adhered to the PRISMA reporting guidelines for systematic reviews. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) are licensed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and more recently for heart failure with or without diabetes. They have been shown to be safe (from the cardiovascular (CV) perspective) and effective (in terms of glycaemia, and in some cases, in reducing CV events) in extensive randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, there remain concerns regarding the generalisability of these findings (to those ineligible for RCT participation) and about non-CV safety. For effectiveness, population-based pharmacoepidemiology studies can confirm and extend the findings of RCTs to broader populations and explore safety, for which RCTs are not usually powered, in more detail. METHODS: A pre-planned and registered ((International PROSPEctive Register Of Systematic Reviews) PROSPERO registration CRD42019160792) systematic review of population-based studies investigating SGLT2i effectiveness and safety, following Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 37 studies were identified (total n = 1,300,184 adults; total follow-up 910,577 person-years; exposures: SGLT2i class, canagliflozin, dapagliflozin and empagliflozin) exploring CV disease (CVD) outcomes, acute kidney injury (AKI), lower limb amputation (LLA), diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), bone fracture, urinary tract infection (UTI), genital mycotic infection (GMI), hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis and venous thromboembolism. For CV and mortality outcomes, studies confirmed the associated safety of these drugs and correlated closely with the findings from RCTs, which may extend to primary CVD prevention (major adverse cardiovascular events point estimate range (PER) hazard ratio (HR) 0.78-0.94; hospitalised heart failure PER HR 0.48-0.79). For safety outcomes, SGLT2i exposure was not associated with an increased risk of AKI (PER HR 0.40-0.96), fractures (PER HR 0.87-1.11), hypoglycaemia (PER HR 0.76-2.49) or UTI (PER HR 0.72-0.98). There was a signal for increased association for GMIs (PER HR 2.08-3.15), and possibly for LLA (PER HR 0.74-2.79) and DKA (PER HR 0.96-2.14), but with considerable uncertainty. CONCLUSION: In T2D, SGLT2is appear safe from the CV perspective and may have associated benefit in primary as well as secondary CVD prevention. For safety, they may be associated with an increased risk of GMI, LLA and DKA, although longer follow-up studies are needed.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: Recreational use of novel psychoactive substance (NPS) has become increasingly common. We aimed to assess the association of national legislation and local trading standards activity with hospital presentations. METHODS: We established observational cohorts of patients with recreational drug toxicity presenting to Edinburgh Royal Infirmary and dying with detectable recreational drugs in Edinburgh. We assessed associations with two temporary class drug-orders (April 2015: methylphenidates, Nov 2015: methiopropamine), the Psychoactive Substances Act (June 2016), and trading standards forfeiture orders (October 2015). RESULTS: The methylphenidate temporary class drug-order was associated with rapid 46.7% (P = 0.002) and 21.0% (P = 0.003) reductions in presentations and admissions, respectively, for NPS drug toxicity, comparing 12 months before with 6 months after. The change was greatest for ethylphenidate toxicity (96.7% reduction in admissions, P < 0.001) that was partly offset by a tripling in synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist cases (P < 0.001) over the next 6 months. This increase reversed following trading standards activity removing all NPS drugs from local shops in October 2015, associated with 64.3% (P < 0.001) and 83.7% (P < 0.001) reductions in presentations and admissions, respectively, for all NPS drugs over the next 12 months. The effect was sustained and associated with a reduced postmortem detection of stimulant NPS drugs. The two interventions prevented an estimated 557 (95% confidence interval 327-934) NPS admissions during 2016, saving an estimated £303 030 (£177 901-508 133) in hospital costs. CONCLUSIONS: We show here that drug legislation and trading standards activity may be associated with effective and sustained prevention. Widespread adoption of trading standards enforcement, together with focused legislation, may turn the tide against these highly-damaging drugs.
