Efficacy of human prothrombin complex concentrate in the treatment of warfarin overdose in patients receiving warfarin for mechanical heart valve replacement.

Warfarin, a widely utilized anticoagulant, is paramount for preventing thromboembolic events in patients with mechanical heart valve replacements. However, its narrow therapeutic index can lead to over-anticoagulation and overdose, resulting in serious health risks. This study examines the efficacy of human prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) in managing warfarin overdose, in comparison with traditional treatments. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 162 adults who presented with warfarin overdose (INR > 5.0) at a tertiary care hospital between 2016 and 2020. Participants were divided into 2 groups-those treated with PCC (n = 57) and those treated with conventional methods (n = 105), including vitamin K and fresh frozen plasma. The primary outcome was the rate of reaching the target (International Normalized Ratio) INR within 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included transfusion requirements, thromboembolic events, adverse reactions, 30-day mortality, and length of hospital stay. PCC demonstrated significant efficacy, with 89.5% of patients achieving the target INR within 24 hours, compared to 64.8% in the control group (P < .05). The PCC group also had reduced transfusion requirements and a shorter average hospital stay. There was no significant difference in thromboembolic events or adverse reactions between the 2 groups, and the reduced 30-day mortality in the PCC group was not statistically significant. Human prothrombin complex concentrate is associated with rapid reaching the target INR, decreased transfusion needs, and shortened hospitalization, making it a promising option for warfarin overdose management. While the results are encouraging, larger, multicenter, randomized controlled trials are necessary to further validate these findings and optimize PCC administration protocols.

Perspectives of people experiencing homelessness with recent non-fatal street drug overdose on the Pharmacist and Homeless Outreach Engagement and Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx (PHOENIx) intervention.

INTRODUCTION: In Scotland, a third of all deaths of people experiencing homelessness (PExH) are street-drug-related, and less than half of their multiple physical- and mental health conditions are treated. New, holistic interventions are required to address these health inequalities. PHOENIx (Pharmacist Homeless Outreach Engagement and Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx) is delivered on outreach by National Health Service (NHS) pharmacist independent prescribers in partnership with third sector homelessness charity workers. We describe participant's perspectives of PHOENIx. METHODS: This study aims to understand experiences of the PHOENIx intervention by participants recruited into the active arm of a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT). Semi-structured in-person interviews explored participants' evaluation of the intervention. In this study, the four components (coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, reflexive monitoring) of the Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) framework underpinned data collection and analyses. RESULTS: We identified four themes that were interpreted within the NPT framework that describe participant evaluation of the PHOENIx intervention: differentiating the intervention from usual care (coherence), embedding connection and consistency in practice (cognitive participation), implementation of practical and emotional operational work (collective action), and lack of power and a commitment to long-term support (reflexive monitoring). Participants successfully engaged with the intervention. Facilitators for participant motivation included the relationship-based work created by the PHOENIx team. This included operational work to fulfil both the practical and emotional needs of participants. Barriers included concern regarding power imbalances within the sector, a lack of long-term support and the impact of the intervention concluding. CONCLUSIONS: Findings identify and describe participants' evaluations of the PHOENIx intervention. NPT is a theoretical framework facilitating understanding of experiences, highlighting both facilitators and barriers to sustained engagement and investment. Our findings inform future developments regarding a subsequent definitive RCT of PHOENIx, despite challenges brought about by challenging micro and macro-economic and political landscapes.

Use of Intravenous Lipid Emulsion Therapy and Insulin in a Case of Tarka Intoxication.

INTRODUCTION: Tarka (trandolapril/verapamil hydrohloride extended-release) is a fixed-dose combination antihypertensive drug formed from verapamil hydrochloride and trandolapril. Toxicologic manifestations of Tarka overdose are altered mental status, bradycardia, hypotension, atrioventricular block (first-degree), hyperglycemia, metabolic acidosis, and shock. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a case of Tarka toxicity in a 2-year-old girl who presented with altered mental status, cardiogenic shock, hypotension, bradycardia, severe metabolic acidosis, hyperglycemia, and first-degree atrioventricular block. We started fluid resuscitation, epinephrine, norepinephrine, and insulin. Because of the patient's hyperlactatemia and hypotension despite standard therapies, we initiated intravenous lipid emulsion (ILE) therapy, after which her condition improved promptly. DISCUSSION: Tarka overdose may be life-threatening as it can cause cardiogenic shock. In our patient, the regression of lactate elevation in a short time with ILE therapy and the improvement of her general condition highlight the importance of ILE. CONCLUSIONS: ILE is an alternative treatment method for acute lipophilic drug intoxications, such as Tarka.

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.

"It didn't hurt me": patients' and providers' perspectives on unsupervised take-home doses, drug diversion, and overdose risks in the provision of medication for opioid use disorder during COVID-19 in San Juan, Puerto Rico.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, clinics offering medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) needed to rapidly introduce unsupervised take-home dosing, while relapsing patients and patients unable to enter treatment faced increased risks of fentanyl-related overdose deaths and other drug-related harms. Based on a qualitative study of people who inject drugs (PWID) receiving MOUD treatment and MOUD staff in Puerto Rico, this paper documents the lived experiences of patients and providers during this period and the risk perceptions and management strategies to address substance misuse and drug diversion attributable to unsupervised take-home-dose delivery. METHODS: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with patients (N = 25) and staff (N = 25) in two clinics providing MOUD in San Juan, Puerto Rico, during 2022. Patients and staff were receiving or providing treatment during the pandemic, and patients reported injection drug use during the past thirty days. RESULTS: Patients were overwhelmingly male (84%), unmarried (72%), and unemployed (52%), with almost half (44%) injecting one to three times a day. Mean time in treatment was 7 years. Staff had a mean age of 46 years with more than half of the sample (63%) female. The majority of patients believed that unsupervised take-home dosing had no significant effect on their treatment adherence or engagement. In contrast, providers expressed concerns over the potential for drug diversion and possible increased risks of patient attrition, overdose episodes, and poor treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the importance of insider perspectives on harm-reduction changes in policy implemented during a health crisis. Of note is the finding that staff disagreed among themselves regarding the potential harms of diversion and changes in drug testing protocols. These different perspectives are important to address so that future pandemic policies are successfully designed and implemented. Our study also illuminates disagreement in risk assessments between patients and providers. This suggests that preparation for emergency treatment plans requires enhanced communication with patients to match treatments to the context of lived experience.

Acute quadruple extremity compartment syndrome due to angio-oedema after polypharmacy overdose including olmesartan medoxomil, telmisartan and vildagliptin.

This case report describes a rare manifestation of acute compartment syndrome (ACS) involving all four extremities, precipitated by angio-oedema in a middle-aged woman who consumed an overdose of multiple medications: nifedipine, azelnidipine, amlodipine besylate, olmesartan medoxomil, telmisartan, esaxerenone and vildagliptin. She presented with haemodynamic instability, necessitating intubation. Despite stabilising haemodynamic parameters within 24 hours, she manifested escalating extremity oedema. At 52 hours after ingestion, mottled skin was observed, along with necrotic alterations in the swollen hands and compartment pressures exceeding 30 mm Hg in all extremities. ACS was diagnosed, leading to fasciotomies. The aetiology is postulated to be drug-induced angio-oedema, possibly intensified by the concurrent overdose of olmesartan medoxomil, telmisartan and vildagliptin, each of which has a risk of angio-oedema even at standard dosages. This scenario is a very rare case caused by drug-induced angio-oedema, which underscores the importance of vigilant monitoring to detect ACS in patients with progressing limb oedema.

[An overview of natural entheogens]. / Un aperçu des enthéogènes naturels.

Entheogens are a group of little-known psychoactive substances which consumption is nevertheless frequently mentioned in outpatient care and which can have harmful effects. This raises the question of appropriate management of their effects, as well as the treatment of any overdose. In this article, we focus on five of these substances, which are rarely described in the medical literature. At present, few studies exist on their long-term effects on health, and this type of niche consumption does not seem problematic from the authorities' point of view. Rapid screening is unavailable because it has not been developed, and the management of overdoses is often limited to non-specific supportive treatment with benzodiazepines.

Les enthéogènes sont un groupe de substances psychoactives méconnues mais dont la consommation apparaît toutefois lors de consultations ambulatoires et qui peuvent engendrer des effets néfastes. Se pose alors la question de la prise en charge adaptée concernant leurs effets mais également le traitement d'un éventuel surdosage. Dans cet article, le focus a été mis sur cinq de ces substances peu décrites dans la littérature médicale. Actuellement, peu d'études existent sur leurs effets à long terme sur la santé et ce type de consommation de niche ne semble pas problématique du point de vue des autorités. Le dépistage rapide n'est pas disponible car pas développé et la prise en charge des surdosages se limite souvent à un traitement de soutien non spécifique par benzodiazépines.

Is a randomised controlled trial of take home naloxone distributed in emergency settings likely to be feasible and acceptable? Findings from a UK qualitative study exploring perspectives of people who use opioids and emergency services staff.

OBJECTIVE: Distribution of take-home naloxone (THN) by emergency services may increase access to THN and reduce deaths and morbidity from opioid overdose. As part of a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of distribution of THN kits and education within ambulance services and Emergency Departments (EDs), we used qualitative methods to explore key stakeholders' perceptions of feasibility and acceptability of delivering the trial. METHODS: We undertook semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 26 people who use opioids and with 20 paramedics and ED staff from two intervention sites between 2019 and 2021. Interviews and focus groups were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: People using opioids reported high awareness of overdose management, including personal experience of THN use. Staff perceived emergency service provision of THN as a low-cost, low-risk intervention with potential to reduce mortality, morbidity and health service use. Staff understood the trial aims and considered it compatible with their work. All participants supported widening access to THN but reported limited trial recruitment opportunities partly due to difficulties in consenting patients during overdose. Procedural problems, restrictive recruitment protocols, limited staff buy-in and patients already owning THN limited trial recruitment. Determining trial effectiveness was challenging due to high levels of alternative community provision of THN. CONCLUSIONS: Distribution of THN in emergency settings was considered feasible and acceptable for stakeholders but an RCT to establish the effectiveness of THN delivery is unlikely to generate further useful evidence due to difficulties in recruiting patients and assessing benefits.

County-level factors associated with a mismatch between opioid overdose mortality and availability of opioid treatment facilities.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose deaths in the United States remain a major public health crisis. Little is known about counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality but low availability of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment facilities. We sought to identify characteristics of United States (US) counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality and low rates of opioid treatment facilities. METHODS: Rates of overdose mortality from 3,130 US counties were compared with availability of opioid treatment facilities that prescribed or allowed medications for OUD (MOUD), from 2018-2019. The outcome variable, "risk-availability mismatch" county, was a binary indicator of a high rate (above national average) of opioid overdose mortality with a low (below national average) rate of opioid treatment facilities. Covariates of interest included county-level sociodemographics and rates of insurance, unemployment, educational attainment, poverty, urbanicity, opioid prescribing, depression, heart disease, Gini index, and Theil index. Multilevel logistic regression, accounting for the clustering of counties within states, was used to determine associations with being a "risk-availability mismatch" county. RESULTS: Of 3,130 counties, 1,203 (38.4%) had high rates of opioid overdose mortality. A total of 1,098 counties (35.1%) lacked a publicly-available opioid treatment facility in 2019. In the adjusted model, counties with an additional 1% of: white residents (odds ratio, OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03), unemployment (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19), and residents without insurance (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08) had increased odds of being a mismatch county. Counties that were metropolitan (versus non-metropolitan) had an increased odds of being a mismatch county (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.45-2.38). CONCLUSION: Assessing mismatch between treatment availability and need provides useful information to characterize counties that require greater public health investment. Interventions to reduce overdose mortality are unlikely to be effective if they do not take into account diverse upstream factors, including sociodemographics, disease burden, and geographic context of communities.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Naloxone.

Naloxone is a World Health Organization (WHO)-listed essential medicine and is the first choice for treating the respiratory depression of opioids, also by lay-people witnessing an opioid overdose. Naloxone acts by competitive displacement of opioid agonists at the µ-opioid receptor (MOR). Its effect depends on pharmacological characteristics of the opioid agonist, such as dissociation rate from the MOR receptor and constitution of the victim. Aim of treatment is a balancing act between restoration of respiration (not consciousness) and avoidance of withdrawal, achieved by titration to response after initial doses of 0.4-2 mg. Naloxone is rapidly eliminated [half-life (t1/2) 60-120 min] due to high clearance. Metabolites are inactive. Major routes for administration are intravenous, intramuscular, and intranasal, the latter primarily for take-home naloxone. Nasal bioavailability is about 50%. Nasal uptake [mean time to maximum concentration (Tmax) 15-30 min] is likely slower than intramuscular, as reversal of respiration lag behind intramuscular naloxone in overdose victims. The intraindividual, interindividual and between-study variability in pharmacokinetics in volunteers are large. Variability in the target population is unknown. The duration of action of 1 mg intravenous (IV) is 2 h, possibly longer by intramuscular and intranasal administration. Initial parenteral doses of 0.4-0.8 mg are usually sufficient to restore breathing after heroin overdose. Fentanyl overdoses likely require higher doses of naloxone. Controlled clinical trials are feasible in opioid overdose but are absent in cohorts with synthetic opioids. Modeling studies provide valuable insight in pharmacotherapy but cannot replace clinical trials. Laypeople should always have access to at least two dose kits for their interim intervention.

Effect of intravenous lipid therapy in critically ill pediatric patients with calcium channel blocker toxicity.

BACKGROUND: Overdose with calcium-channel blockers (CCBs) still maintain their importance with a high lethality rate after exposure. We report the intravenous lipid emulsion therapy (ILE) therapy in our CCB overdose patients. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of 6 patients with CCB intoxication from Batman Training and Research Hospital PICU between March 2021 and September 2022. Patients aged 0-18 years who received ILE treatment for CCB poisoning were included. RESULTS: All six patients ingested CCB with the intention of committing suicide and were followed up in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). All patients received ILE therapy due to hemodynamic instability despite intravenous fluid boluses, calcium, glucagon, insulin-dextrose, and vasoactive agents. Vasoactive-Inotropic Score (VIS) decreased after ILE treatment. All patients were transferred from the PICU after recovery. CONCLUSIONS: ILE therapy should be kept in mind as a salvage therapy in hemodynamically unstable CCB poisoning cases that do not respond to initial and advanced options.

Adverse Effects After Prehospital Administration of Naloxone by Bystanders: A Preliminary Study.

OBJECTIVE: Opioid use disorder is a cause of significant morbidity and mortality. In order to reverse opioid overdose as quickly as possible, many institutions and municipalities have encouraged people with no professional medical training to carry and administer naloxone. This study sought to provide preliminary data for research into the rates of adverse effects of naloxone when administered by bystanders compared to Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel, since this question has not been studied previously. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study performed at an urban, tertiary, academic medical center that operates its own EMS service. A consecutive sample of patients presenting to EMS with opioid overdose requiring naloxone was separated into two groups based on whether naloxone was administered by bystanders or by EMS personnel. Each group was analyzed to determine the incidence of four pre-specified adverse events. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events between the bystander (19%) and EMS (16%) groups (OR = 1.23; 95% CI, 0.63 - 2.32; P = .499) in this small sample. Based on these initial results, a study would need a sample size of 6,188 in order to reach this conclusion with 80% power. Similarly, there were no significant differences in the rates of any of the individual adverse events. Secondary analysis of patients' demographics showed differences between the two groups which generate hypotheses for further investigation of disparities in naloxone administration. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study provides foundational data for further investigation of naloxone administration by bystanders. Adverse events after the prehospital administration of naloxone are rare, and future studies will require large sample sizes. These preliminary data did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in adverse event rates when comparing naloxone administration by bystanders and EMS clinicians. This study provides data that will be useful for conducting further research on multiple facets of this topic.

Emergency Department Take-Home Naloxone Improves Access Compared with Pharmacy-Dispensed Naloxone.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose is a major cause of mortality in the United States. In spite of efforts to increase naloxone availability, distribution to high-risk populations remains a challenge. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of multiple different naloxone distribution methods on patient obtainment of naloxone in the emergency department (ED) setting. METHODS: Naloxone was provided to patients in three 12-month phases between February 2020 and February 2023. In Phase 1, physicians could offer patients electronic prescriptions, which were filled in a nearby in-hospital discharge pharmacy. In Phase 2, physicians directly provided patients with take-home naloxone at discharge. In Phase 3, distribution was expanded to allow ED staff to hand patients take-home naloxone at time of discharge. The total number of prescriptions, rate of prescription filling, and amount of take-home naloxone kits provided to patients were then statistically analyzed using 95% confidence intervals (CI) and chi-squared testing. RESULTS: In Phase 1, 348 naloxone prescriptions were written, with 133 (95% CI 112.5-153.5) filled. In Phase 2, 327 (95% CI 245.5-408.5) take-home naloxone kits were given to patients by physicians. In Phase 3, 677 (95% CI 509.5-844.5) take-home naloxone kits were provided to patients by ED staff. There were statistically significant increases in naloxone distribution from Phase 1 to Phase 2, and Phase 2 to Phase 3. CONCLUSIONS: Take-home naloxone increases access when compared with naloxone prescriptions in the ED setting. A multidisciplinary approach combined with the removal of regulatory and administrative barriers allowed for further increased distribution of no-cost naloxone to patients.

Denial of prescription pain medication among people who use drugs in Vancouver, Canada.

BACKGROUND: People who use drugs experience pain at two to three times the rate of the general population and yet continue to face substantial barriers to accessing appropriate and adequate treatment for pain. In light of the overdose crisis and revised opioid prescribing guidelines, we sought to identify factors associated with being denied pain medication and longitudinally investigate denial rates among people who use drugs. METHODS: We used multivariable generalized estimating equations analyses to investigate factors associated with being denied pain medication among people who use drugs reporting pain in three prospective cohort studies in Vancouver, Canada. Analyses were restricted to study periods in which participants requested a prescription for pain from a healthcare provider. Descriptive statistics detail denial rates and actions taken by participants after being denied. RESULTS: Among 1168 participants who requested a prescription for pain between December 2012 and March 2020, the median age was 47 years and 63.0% were male. Among 4,179 six-month observation periods, 907 (21.7%) included a report of being denied requested pain medication. In multivariable analyses, age was negatively associated with prescription denial (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.97-0.99), while self-managing pain (AOR = 2.48, 95%CI:2.04-3.00), experiencing a non-fatal overdose (AOR = 1.51, 95%CI:1.22-1.88), engagement in opioid agonist therapy (AOR = 1.32, 95%CI:1.09-1.61), and daily use of heroin or other unregulated opioids (AOR = 1.32, 95%CI:1.05-1.66) were positively associated with being denied. Common actions taken (n = 895) after denial were accessing the unregulated drug supply (53.5%), doing nothing (30.6%), and going to a different doctor/emergency room (6.1%). The period following the introduction of new prescribing guidelines was not associated with a change in denial rates. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of people who use drugs continue to be denied prescriptions for pain, with such denial associated with important substance use-related harms, including non-fatal overdose. Guidelines specific to the pharmaceutical management of pain among people who use drugs are needed.

Assessing the impact of a new medical toxicology service on the treatment of paracetamol overdose at a large tertiary care hospital.

BACKGROUND: Paracetamol overdose is the most common cause of acute liver failure in the United States. Administration of acetylcysteine is the standard of care for this intoxication. Laboratory values and clinical criteria are used to guide treatment duration, but decision-making is nuanced and often complex and difficult. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the introduction of a medical toxicology service on the rate of errors in the management of paracetamol overdose. METHODS: This was a single center, retrospective, cohort evaluation. Patients with suspected paracetamol overdose were divided into two groups: those attending in the 1 year period before and those in the 1 year after the introduction of the medical toxicology service. The primary outcome was the frequency of deviations from the established management of paracetamol intoxication, using international guidelines as a reference. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were eligible for the study (20 pre-toxicology-service, 34 post-toxicology-service). The frequency of incorrect therapeutic decisions was significantly lower in the post-toxicology service implementation versus the pre-implementation group (P = 0.005). DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that a medical toxicology service reduces the incidence of management errors, including the number of missed acetylcysteine doses in patients with paracetamol overdose. The limitations include the retrospective study design and that the study was conducted at a single center, which may limit generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a medical toxicology service was associated with a decrease in the number of errors in the management of paracetamol overdose.

Developing medical simulations for opioid overdose response training: A qualitative analysis of narratives from responders to overdoses.

Medical simulation offers a controlled environment for studying challenging clinical care situations that are difficult to observe directly. Overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs aim to train potential rescuers in responding to opioid overdoses, but assessing rescuer performance in real-life situations before emergency medical services arrive is exceedingly complex. There is an opportunity to incorporate individuals with firsthand experience in treating out-of-hospital overdoses into the development of simulation scenarios. Realistic overdose simulations could provide OEND programs with valuable tools to effectively teach hands-on skills and support context-sensitive training regimens. In this research, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 individuals experienced in responding to opioid overdoses including emergency department physicians, first responders, OEND program instructors, and peer recovery specialists. Two coders conducted qualitative content analysis using open and axial thematic coding to identify nuances associated with illicit and prescription opioid overdoses. The results are presented as narrative findings complemented by summaries of the frequency of themes across the interviews. Over 20 hours of audio recording were transcribed verbatim and then coded. During the open and axial thematic coding process several primary themes, along with subthemes, were identified, highlighting the distinctions between illicit and prescription opioid overdoses. Distinct contextual details, such as locations, clinical presentations, the environment surrounding the patient, and bystanders' behavior, were used to create four example simulations of out-of-hospital overdoses. The narrative findings in this qualitative study offer context-sensitive information for developing out-of-hospital overdose scenarios applicable to simulation training. These insights can serve as a valuable resource, aiding instructors and researchers in systematically creating evidence-based scenarios for both training and research purposes.

Fact vs. fiction: naloxone in the treatment of opioid-induced respiratory depression in the current era of synthetic opioids.

Opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD) deaths are ~80,000 a year in the US and are a major public health issue. Approximately 90% of fatal opioid-related deaths are due to synthetic opioids such as fentanyl, most of which is illicitly manufactured and distributed either on its own or as an adulterant to other drugs of abuse such as cocaine or methamphetamine. Other potent opioids such as nitazenes are also increasingly present in the illicit drug supply, and xylazine, a veterinary tranquilizer, is a prevalent additive to opioids and other drugs of abuse. Naloxone is the main treatment used to reverse OIRD and is available as nasal sprays, prefilled naloxone injection devices, and generic naloxone for injection. An overdose needs to be treated as soon as possible to avoid death, and synthetic opioids such as fentanyl are up to 50 times more potent than heroin, so the availability of new, higher-dose, 5-mg prefilled injection or 8-mg intranasal spray naloxone preparations are important additions for emergency treatment of OIRDs, especially by lay people in the community. Higher naloxone doses are expected to reverse a synthetic overdose more rapidly and the current formulations are ideal for use by untrained lay people in the community. There are potential concerns about severe withdrawal symptoms, or pulmonary edema from treatment with high-dose naloxone. However, from the perspective of first responders, the balance of risks would point to administration of naloxone at the dose required to combat the overdose where the risk of death is very high. The presence of xylazines as an adulterant complicates the treatment of OIRDs, as naloxone is probably ineffective, although it will reverse the respiratory depression due to the opioid. For these patients, hospitalization is particularly vital. Education about the benefits of naloxone remains important not only in informing people about how to treat emergency OIRDs but also how to obtain naloxone. A call to emergency services is also essential after administering naloxone because, although the patient may revive, they may overdose again later because of the short half-life of naloxone and the long-lasting potency of fentanyl and its analogs.