How do we understand the value of drug checking as a component of harm reduction services? A qualitative exploration of client and provider perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Mortality related to opioid overdose in the U.S. has risen sharply in the past decade. In California, opioid overdose death rates more than tripled from 2018 to 2021, and deaths from synthetic opioids such as fentanyl increased more than seven times in those three years alone. Heightened attention to this crisis has attracted funding and programming opportunities for prevention and harm reduction interventions. Drug checking services offer people who use drugs the opportunity to test the chemical content of their own supply, but are not widely used in North America. We report on qualitative data from providers and clients of harm reduction and drug checking services, to explore how these services are used, experienced, and considered. METHODS: We conducted in-depth semi-structured key informant interviews across two samples of drug checking stakeholders: "clients" (individuals who use drugs and receive harm reduction services) and "providers" (subject matter experts and those providing clinical and harm reduction services to people who use drugs). Provider interviews were conducted via Zoom from June-November, 2022. Client interviews were conducted in person in San Francisco over a one-week period in November 2022. Data were analyzed following the tenets of thematic analysis. RESULTS: We found that the value of drug checking includes but extends well beyond overdose prevention. Participants discussed ways that drug checking can fill a regulatory vacuum, serve as a tool of informal market regulation at the community level, and empower public health surveillance systems and clinical response. We present our findings within three key themes: (1) the role of drug checking in overdose prevention; (2) benefits to the overall agency, health, and wellbeing of people who use drugs; and (3) impacts of drug checking services at the community and systems levels. CONCLUSION: This study contributes to growing evidence of the effectiveness of drug checking services in mitigating risks associated with substance use, including overdose, through enabling people who use and sell drugs to test their own supply. It further contributes to discussions around the utility of drug checking and harm reduction, in order to inform legislation and funding allocation.

Reducing overdose deaths among persons with opioid use disorder in connecticut.

BACKGROUND: People in Connecticut are now more likely to die of a drug-related overdose than a traffic accident. While Connecticut has had some success in slowing the rise in overdose death rates, substantial additional progress is necessary. METHODS: We developed, verified, and calibrated a mechanistic simulation of alternative overdose prevention policy options, including scaling up naloxone (NLX) distribution in the community and medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) among people who are incarcerated (MOUD-INC) and in the community (MOUD-COM) in a simulated cohort of people with OUD in Connecticut. We estimated how maximally scaling up each option individually and in combinations would impact 5-year overdose deaths, life-years, and quality-adjusted life-years. All costs were assessed in 2021 USD, employing a health sector perspective in base-case analyses and a societal perspective in sensitivity analyses, using a 3% discount rate and 5-year and lifetime time horizons. RESULTS: Maximally scaling NLX alone reduces overdose deaths 20% in the next 5 years at a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER); if injectable rather than intranasal NLX was distributed, 240 additional overdose deaths could be prevented. Maximally scaling MOUD-COM and MOUD-INC alone reduce overdose deaths by 14% and 6% respectively at favorable ICERS. Considering all permutations of scaling up policies, scaling NLX and MOUD-COM together is the cost-effective choice, reducing overdose deaths 32% at ICER $19,000/QALY. In sensitivity analyses using a societal perspective, all policy options were cost saving and overdose deaths reduced 33% over 5 years while saving society $338,000 per capita over the simulated cohort lifetime. CONCLUSIONS: Maximally scaling access to naloxone and MOUD in the community can reduce 5-year overdose deaths by 32% among people with OUD in Connecticut under realistic budget scenarios. If societal cost savings due to increased productivity and reduced crime costs are considered, one-third of overdose deaths can be reduced by maximally scaling all three policy options, while saving money.

Implementation and Evaluation of a Bystander Naloxone Training Course.

Introduction: Bystander provision of naloxone is a key modality to reduce opioid overdose-related death. Naloxone training courses are available, but no standardized program exists. As part of a bystander empowerment course, we created and evaluated a brief naloxone training module. Methods: This was a retrospective evaluation of a naloxone training course, which was paired with Stop the Bleed training for hemorrhage control and was offered to administrative staff in an office building. Participants worked in an organization related to healthcare, but none were clinicians. The curriculum included the following topics: 1) background about the opioid epidemic; 2) how to recognize the signs of an opioid overdose; 3) actions not to take when encountering an overdose victim; 4) the correct steps to take when encountering an overdose victim; 5) an overview of naloxone products; and 6) Good Samaritan protection laws. The 20-minute didactic section was followed by a hands-on session with nasal naloxone kits and a simulation mannequin. The course was evaluated with the Opioid Overdose Knowledge (OOKS) and Opioid Overdose Attitudes (OOAS) scales for take-home naloxone training evaluation. We used the paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test to compare scores pre- and post-course. Results: Twenty-eight participants completed the course. The OOKS, measuring objective knowledge about opioid overdose and naloxone, had improved scores from a median of 73.2% (interquartile range [IQR] 68.3%-79.9%) to 91.5% (IQR 85.4%-95.1%), P < 0.001. The three domains on the OOAS score also showed statistically significant results. Competency to manage an overdose improved on a five-point scale from a median of 2.5 (IQR 2.4-2.9) to a median of 3.7 (IQR 3.5-4.1), P < 0.001. Concerns about managing an overdose decreased (improved) from a median of 2.3 (IQR 1.9-2.6) to median 1.8 (IQR 1.5-2.1), P < 0.001. Readiness to intervene in an opioid overdose improved from a median of 4 (IQR 3.8-4.2) to a median of 4.2 (IQR 4-4.2), P < 0.001. Conclusion: A brief course designed to teach bystanders about opioid overdose and naloxone was feasible and effective. We encourage hospitals and other organizations to use and promulgate this model. Furthermore, we suggest the convening of a national consortium to achieve consensus on program content and delivery.

High-dose naloxone formulations are not as essential as we thought.

Naloxone is an effective FDA-approved opioid antagonist for reversing opioid overdoses. Naloxone is available to the public and can be administered through intramuscular (IM), intravenous (IV), and intranasal spray (IN) routes. Our literature review investigates the adequacy of two doses of standard IM or IN naloxone in reversing fentanyl overdoses compared to newer high-dose naloxone formulations. Moreover, our initiative incorporates the experiences of people who use drugs, enabling a more practical and contextually-grounded analysis. The evidence indicates that the vast majority of fentanyl overdoses can be successfully reversed using two standard IM or IN dosages. Exceptions include cases of carfentanil overdose, which necessitates ≥ 3 doses for reversal. Multiple studies documented the risk of precipitated withdrawal using ≥ 2 doses of naloxone, notably including the possibility of recurring overdose symptoms after resuscitation, contingent upon the half-life of the specific opioid involved. We recommend distributing multiple doses of standard IM or IN naloxone to bystanders and educating individuals on the adequacy of two doses in reversing fentanyl overdoses. Individuals should continue administration until the recipient is revived, ensuring appropriate intervals between each dose along with rescue breaths, and calling emergency medical services if the individual is unresponsive after two doses. We do not recommend high-dose naloxone formulations as a substitute for four doses of IM or IN naloxone due to the higher cost, risk of precipitated withdrawal, and limited evidence compared to standard doses. Future research must take into consideration lived and living experience, scientific evidence, conflicts of interest, and the bodily autonomy of people who use drugs.

Opioid Overdose Knowledge Among Adolescents and Young Adults.

This cross-sectional study examines awareness of opioid overdose, the ability to administer naloxone, and the willingness to help during an overdose on college campuses across the US.

Acceptability and anticipated effectiveness of a safe supply of opioids, among people who inject opioids in King County, WA.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose mortality in the US has exceeded one million deaths over the last two decades. A regulated opioid supply may help prevent future overdose deaths by reducing exposure to the unregulated opioid supply. We examined the acceptability, delivery model preference, and anticipated effectiveness of different regulated opioid models among people in the Seattle area who inject opioids. METHODS: We enrolled people who inject drugs in the 2022 Seattle-area National HIV Behavior Surveillance (NHBS) survey. Participants were recruited between July and December 2022 using respondent-driven sampling. Participants who reported injecting opioids (N = 453) were asked whether regulated opioids would be acceptable, their preferred model of receiving regulated opioids, and the anticipated change in individual overdose risk from accessing a regulated opioid supply. RESULTS: In total, 369 (81 %) participants who injected opioids reported that a regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to them. Of the 369 who found a regulated opioid supply to be acceptable, the plurality preferred a take-home model where drugs are prescribed (35 %), followed closely by a dispensary model that required no prescription (28 %), and a prescribed model where drugs need to be consumed on site (13 %), a model where no prescription is required and drugs can be accessed in a community setting with a one-time upfront payment was the least preferred model (5 %). Most participants (69 %) indicated that receiving a regulated opioid supply would be "a lot less risky" than their current supply, 20 % said, "a little less risky", 10 % said no difference, and 1 % said a little or a lot more risky. CONCLUSION: A regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to most participants, and participants reported it would greatly reduce their risk of overdose. As overdose deaths continue to increase in Washington state pragmatic and effective solutions that reduce exposure to unregulated drugs are needed.

Statewide efforts to address the opioid epidemic: Results from a national survey of single state agencies.

BACKGROUND: Single State Agencies (SSAs) are at the forefront of efforts to address the nation's opioid epidemic, responsible for allocating billions of dollars in federal, state, and local funds to ensure service quality, promote best practices, and expand access to care. Federal expenditures to SSAs have more than tripled since the early years of the epidemic, yet, it is unclear what initiatives SSAs have undertaken to address the crisis and how they are financing these efforts. METHODS: This study used data from an internet-based survey of SSAs, conducted by the University of Chicago Survey Lab from January to December 2021 (response rate of 94 %). The survey included a set of 14 items identifying statewide efforts to address the opioid epidemic and six funding sources. We calculated the percentage of SSAs that supported each statewide effort and the percentage of SSAs reporting use of each source of funding across the 14 statewide efforts. RESULTS: Treatment of opioid-related overdose figured most prominently among statewide efforts, with all SSAs providing funding for naloxone distribution and all but one SSA supporting naloxone training. Recovery support services, Project ECHO, and Hub and Spoke models were supported by the vast majority of SSAs. Statewide efforts related to expanding access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) received somewhat less support, with 45 % of SSAs supporting mobile methadone/MOUD clinics/programs and 70 % supporting buprenorphine in emergency departments. A relatively low proportion of SSAs (54 %) provided support for syringe services programs. State Opioid Response (SOR) funds were the most common funding source reported by SSAs (57 % of SSAs), followed by block grant funds (19 %) and other state funding (15 %). CONCLUSION: Results highlight a range of SSA efforts to address the nation's opioid epidemic. Limited adoption of efforts to expand access to MOUD and harm reduction services may represent missed opportunities. The uncertainty over reauthorization of the SOR grant post-2025 also raises concerns over sustainability of funding for many of these statewide initiatives.

Economic Evaluations of Establishing Opioid Overdose Prevention Centers in 12 North American Cities: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Overdose prevention centers (OPCs) provide a safe place where people can consume preobtained drugs under supervision so that a life-saving medical response can be provided quickly in the event of an overdose. OPCs are programs that are established in Canada and have recently become legally sanctioned in only a few United States jurisdictions. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review that summarizes and identifies gaps of economic evidence on establishing OPCs in North America to guide future expansion of OPCs. RESULTS: We included 16 final studies that were evaluated with the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards and Drummond checklists. Eight studies reported cost-effectiveness results (eg, cost per overdose avoided or cost per quality-adjusted life-year), with 6 also including cost-benefit; 5 reported only cost-benefit results, and 3 cost offsets. Health outcomes primarily included overdose mortality outcomes or HIV/hepatitis C virus infections averted. Most studies used mathematical modeling and projected OPC outcomes using the experience of a single facility in Vancouver, BC. CONCLUSIONS: OPCs were found to be cost-saving or to have favorable cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit ratios across all studies. Future studies should incorporate the experience of OPCs established in various settings and use a greater diversity of modeling designs.

A Practical Guide to Implementing an Evidenced-Based Hands-On Naloxone Training.

Synthetic opioids contribute to the majority of opioid overdose-related deaths in the United States. Expansion of naloxone training to community laypersons is one strategy to mitigate opioid overdose-related deaths. A hands-on naloxone training demonstrated efficacy in improving opioid knowledge and overdose response in baccalaureate nursing students, Greek-affiliated students, and rural clinicians and staff post-training. The purpose of this practical guide is to provide detailed steps to implement an evidence-based hands-on naloxone training for laypersons in community settings. The hands-on naloxone training consisted of five components: evaluator training, a validated pre-post opioid knowledge questionnaire, an opioid lecture, a performance evaluation, and a satisfaction survey. Post-training, trainees demonstrated increased knowledge related to opioids and overdose response, and they felt comfortable administering naloxone to someone experiencing an opioid overdose. Researchers, educators, and community health nurses can adapt this evidence-based practical guide to train peers and acquaintances who are likely to witness an opioid overdose. Virtual training and multi-lingual protocols should be considered to successfully train diverse groups of community laypersons. An active hands-on naloxone training can improve confidence for community health nurses and other health care professionals, and it may reduce delays in response time and naloxone administration. Nurses can use this hands-on training to educate students, families, community members, and stakeholders how to respond to an opioid overdose event.

Characterizing opioid overdose hotspots for place-based overdose prevention and treatment interventions: A geo-spatial analysis of Rhode Island, USA.

OBJECTIVE: Examine differences in neighborhood characteristics and services between overdose hotspot and non-hotspot neighborhoods and identify neighborhood-level population factors associated with increased overdose incidence. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective analysis of Rhode Island, USA residents who had a fatal or non-fatal overdose from 2016 to 2020 using an environmental scan and data from Rhode Island emergency medical services, State Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System, and the American Community Survey. We conducted a spatial scan via SaTScan to identify non-fatal and fatal overdose hotspots and compared the characteristics of hotspot and non-hotspot neighborhoods. We identified associations between census block group-level characteristics using a Besag-York-Mollié model specification with a conditional autoregressive spatial random effect. RESULTS: We identified 7 non-fatal and 3 fatal overdose hotspots in Rhode Island during the study period. Hotspot neighborhoods had higher proportions of Black and Latino/a residents, renter-occupied housing, vacant housing, unemployment, and cost-burdened households. A higher proportion of hotspot neighborhoods had a religious organization, a health center, or a police station. Non-fatal overdose risk increased in a dose responsive manner with increasing proportions of residents living in poverty. There was increased relative risk of non-fatal and fatal overdoses in neighborhoods with crowded housing above the mean (RR 1.19 [95 % CI 1.05, 1.34]; RR 1.21 [95 % CI 1.18, 1.38], respectively). CONCLUSION: Neighborhoods with increased prevalence of housing instability and poverty are at highest risk of overdose. The high availability of social services in overdose hotspots presents an opportunity to work with established organizations to prevent overdose deaths.

Racial/ethnic differences in receipt of naloxone distributed by opioid overdose prevention programs in New York City.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated racial/ethnic differences in the receipt of naloxone distributed by opioid overdose prevention programs (OOPPs) in New York City (NYC). METHODS: We used naloxone recipient racial/ethnic data collected by OOPPs from April 2018 to March 2019. We aggregated quarterly neighborhood-specific rates of naloxone receipt and other covariates to 42 NYC neighborhoods. We used a multilevel negative binomial regression model to assess the relationship between neighborhood-specific naloxone receipt rates and race/ethnicity. Race/ethnicity was stratified into four mutually exclusive groups: Latino, non-Latino Black, non-Latino White, and non-Latino Other. We also conducted racial/ethnic-specific geospatial analyses to assess whether there was within-group geographic variation in naloxone receipt rates for each racial/ethnic group. RESULTS: Non-Latino Black residents had the highest median quarterly naloxone receipt rate of 41.8 per 100,000 residents, followed by Latino residents (22.0 per 100,000), non-Latino White (13.6 per 100,000) and non-Latino Other residents (13.3 per 100,000). In our multivariable analysis, compared with non-Latino White residents, non-Latino Black residents had a significantly higher receipt rate, and non-Latino Other residents had a significantly lower receipt rate. In the geospatial analyses, both Latino and non-Latino Black residents had the most within-group geographic variation in naloxone receipt rates compared to non-Latino White and Other residents. CONCLUSIONS: This study found significant racial/ethnic differences in naloxone receipt from NYC OOPPs. We observed substantial variation in naloxone receipt for non-Latino Black and Latino residents across neighborhoods, indicating relatively poorer access in some neighborhoods and opportunities for new approaches to address geographic and structural barriers in these locations.

Lessons Learned from Developing Tailored Community Communication Campaigns in the HEALing Communities Study.

This paper outlines lessons learned from tailoring communication campaigns to increase demand for, and reduce stigma toward, evidence-based practices to reduce opioid overdose deaths in 66 communities participating in the HEALing (Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM) Communities Study (HCS). We present nine lessons gathered about how to engage local communities in both virtual and in-person opioid messaging and distribution between February 2019 and June 2022. The research team created four communication campaigns and did extensive, tailored marketing and promotion to assist communities in implementing evidence-based clinical activities to reduce opioid overdose mortality. Various strategies and venues were used to amplify HCS messages, using free and paid outlets for message distribution, focusing primarily on social media due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Increasing the availability of medications for opioid use disorder and naloxone, as HCS attempted, is not enough; getting people to accept and use them depends on communication efforts. This paper focuses on the process of preparing communities for communication campaign activities, which we hope can help guide other communities preparing for opioid or substance-related campaigns in the future.

Changes to opioid overdose deaths and community naloxone access among Black, Hispanic and White people from 2016 to 2021 with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic: An interrupted time-series analysis in Massachusetts, USA.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was associated with a surge in opioid overdose deaths in Massachusetts, particularly affecting racial and ethnic minority communities. We aimed to compare the impact of the pandemic on opioid overdose fatalities and naloxone distribution from community-based programs across racial and ethnic groups in Massachusetts. DESIGN: Interrupted time-series. SETTING AND CASES: Opioid overdose deaths (OODs) among non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic and non-Hispanic other race people in Massachusetts, USA (January 2016 to June 2021). MEASUREMENTS: Rate of OODs per 100 000 people, rate of naloxone kits distributed per 100 000 people and ratio of naloxone kits per opioid overdose death as a measure of naloxone availability. We applied five imputation strategies using complete data in different periods to account for missingness of race and ethnicity for naloxone data. FINDINGS: Before COVID-19 (January 2016 to February 2020), the rate of OODs declined among non-Hispanic White people [0.2% monthly reduction (95% confidence interval = 0.0-0.4%)], yet was relatively constant among all other population groups. The rate of naloxone kits increased across all groups (0.8-1.2% monthly increase) and the ratio of naloxone kits per OOD death among non-Hispanic White was 1.1% (0.8-1.4%) and among Hispanic people was 1.0% (0.2-1.8%). After the onset of the pandemic (March 2020+), non-Hispanic Black people experienced an immediate increase in the rate of OODs [63.6% (16.4-130%)], whereas rates among other groups remained similar. Trends in naloxone rescue kit distribution did not substantively change among any groups, and the ratio of naloxone kits per OOD death for non-Hispanic Black people did not compensate for the surge in OODs deaths in this group. CONCLUSIONS: With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a surge in opioid overdose deaths among non-Hispanic Black people in Massachusetts, USA with no compensatory increase in naloxone rescue kit distribution. For non-Hispanic White and Hispanic people, opioid overdose deaths remained stable and naloxone kit distribution continued to increase.

Racial Inequality in Receipt of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Since 2010, Black persons in the United States have had a greater increase in opioid overdose-related mortality than other groups, but national-level evidence characterizing racial and ethnic disparities in the use of medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) is limited. METHODS: We used Medicare claims data from the 2016-2019 period for a random 40% sample of fee-for-service beneficiaries who were Black, Hispanic, or White; were eligible for Medicare owing to disability; and had an index event related to OUD (nonfatal overdose treated in an emergency department or inpatient setting, hospitalization with injection drug use-related infection, or inpatient or residential rehabilitation or detoxification care). We measured the receipt of medications to treat OUD (buprenorphine, naltrexone, and naloxone), the receipt of high-risk medications (opioid analgesics and benzodiazepines), and health care utilization, all in the 180 days after the index event. We estimated differences in outcomes according to race and ethnic group with adjustment for beneficiary age, sex, index event, count of chronic coexisting conditions, and state of residence. RESULTS: We identified 25,904 OUD-related index events among 23,370 beneficiaries, with 3937 events (15.2%) occurring among Black patients, 2105 (8.1%) among Hispanic patients, and 19,862 (76.7%) among White patients. In the 180 days after the index event, patients received buprenorphine after 12.7% of events among Black patients, after 18.7% of those among Hispanic patients, and after 23.3% of those among White patients; patients received naloxone after 14.4%, 20.7%, and 22.9%, respectively; and patients received benzodiazepines after 23.4%, 29.6%, and 37.1%, respectively. Racial differences in the receipt of medications to treat OUD did not change appreciably from 2016 to 2019 (buprenorphine receipt: after 9.1% of index events among Black patients vs. 21.6% of those among White patients in 2016, and after 14.1% vs. 25.5% in 2019). In all study groups, patients had multiple ambulatory visits in the 180 days after the index event (mean number of visits, 6.6 after events among Black patients, 6.7 after events among Hispanic patients, and 7.6 after events among White patients). CONCLUSIONS: Racial and ethnic differences in the receipt of medications to treat OUD after an index event related to this disorder among patients with disability were substantial and did not change over time. The high incidence of ambulatory visits in all groups showed that disparities persisted despite frequent health care contact. (Funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute on Aging.).

Opioid overdose prevention education in Texas during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Distribution of naloxone and training on its proper use are evidence-based strategies for preventing opioid overdose deaths. In-person naloxone training was conducted in major metropolitan areas and urban centers across Texas as part of a state-wide targeted opioid response program. The training program transitioned to a live, virtual format during the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. This manuscript describes the impact of this transition through analyses of the characteristics of communities reached using the new virtual training format. CASE PRESENTATION: Training participant addresses were compared to county rates of opioid overdose deaths and broadband internet access, and census block comparison to health services shortages, rural designation, and race/ethnicity community characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual training format reached more learners than the in-person events. Training reached nearly half of the counties in Texas, including all with recent opioid overdose deaths. Most participants lived in communities with a shortage of health service providers, and training reached rural areas, those with limited broadband internet availability, and majority Hispanic communities. In the context of restrictions on in-person gathering, the training program successfully shifted to a live, online format. This transition increased participation above rates observed pre-pandemic and reached communities with the need for equipping those most likely to witness an opioid overdose with the proper use of naloxone.

Opioid Use Disorder.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a treatable chronic disorder with episodes of remission and recurrence characterized by loss of control of opioid use, compulsive use, and continued use despite harms. If untreated, OUD is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Buprenorphine and methadone reduce fatal and nonfatal opioid overdose and infectious complications of OUD and are the first-line treatment options. Physicians have an important role to play in diagnosing OUD and its comorbidities, offering evidence-based treatment, and delivering overdose prevention and other harm reduction services to people who continue to use opioids. Interdisciplinary office-based addiction treatment programs support high-quality OUD care.

A Thematic Analysis of Overdose Prevention and Response Efforts in States Experiencing Declines in Rates of Opioid-Involved Overdose Deaths.

OBJECTIVE: To address the opioid overdose epidemic, it is important to understand the broad scope of efforts under way in states, particularly states in which the rate of opioid-involved overdose deaths is declining. The primary objective of this study was to examine core elements of overdose prevention activities in 4 states with a high rate of opioid-involved overdose deaths that experienced a decrease in opioid-involved overdose deaths from 2016 to 2017. METHODS: We identified 5 states experiencing decreases in age-adjusted mortality rates for opioid-involved overdoses from 2016 to 2017 and examined their overdose prevention programs via program narratives developed with collaborators from each state's overdose prevention program. These program narratives used 10 predetermined categories to organize activities: legislative policies; strategic planning; data access, capacity, and dissemination; capacity building; public-facing resources (eg, web-based dashboards); training resources; enhancements and improvements to prescription drug monitoring programs; linkage to care; treatment; and community-focused initiatives. Using qualitative thematic analysis techniques, core elements and context-specific activities emerged. RESULTS: In the predetermined categories of programmatic activities, we identified the following core elements of overdose prevention and response: comprehensive state policies; strategic planning; local engagement; data access, capacity, and dissemination; training of professional audiences (eg, prescribers); treatment infrastructure; and harm reduction. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of core elements and context-specific activities underscores the importance of implementation and adaptation of evidence-based prevention strategies, interdisciplinary partnerships, and collaborations to address opioid overdose. Further evaluation of these state programs and other overdose prevention efforts in states where mortality rates for opioid-involved overdoses declined should focus on impact, optimal timing, and combinations of program activities during the life span of an overdose prevention program.

Prior use of medications for opioid use disorder in ED patients with opioid overdose: prevalence, misuse and overdose severity.

OBJECTIVES: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) reduce opioid overdose (OD) deaths; however, prevalence and misuse of MOUD in ED patients presenting with opioid overdose are unclear, as are any impacts of existing MOUD prescriptions on subsequent OD severity. METHODS: This was a prospective observational cohort of ED patients with opioid OD at two tertiary-care hospitals from 2015 to 19. Patients with confirmed opioid OD (via urine toxicology) were included, while patients with alternate diagnoses, insufficient data, age < 18, and prisoners were excluded. OD severity was defined using: (a) hospital LOS (days); and (b) in-hospital mortality. Time trends by calendar year and associations between MOUD and study outcomes were calculated. RESULTS: In 2829 ED patients with acute drug OD, 696 with confirmed opioid OD were included. Overall, 120 patients (17%) were previously prescribed any MOUD, and MOUD prevalence was significantly higher in 2018 and 2019 compared to 2016 (20.1% and 27.8% vs. 8.8%, p < 0.05). Odds of MOUD misuse were significantly higher for methadone (OR 3.96 95% CI 2.57-6.12) and lowest for buprenorphine (OR 1.16, p = NS). Mean LOS was over 50% longer for methadone (3.08 days) compared to buprenorphine and naltrexone (both 2.0 days, p = NS). Following adjustment for confounders, buprenorphine use was associated with significantly shorter LOS (IRR -0.44 (95%CI -0.85, -0.04)). Odds of death were 30% lower for patients on any MOUD (OR 0.70, 95%CI 0.09-5.72), but highest in the methadone group (OR 0.82, 95%CI 0.10-6.74). CONCLUSIONS: While MOUD prevalence significantly increased over the study period, MOUD misuse occurred for patients taking methadone, and OD LOS overall was lower in patients with any prior buprenorphine prescription.