Interrupted Time Series Analysis: Patient Characteristics and Rates of Opioid-Use-Disorder-Related Emergency Department Visits in the Los Angeles County Public Hospital System during COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to disruptions in care for vulnerable patients, in particular patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). We aimed to examine OUD-related ED visits before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and determine if patient characteristics for OUD-related ED visits changed in the context of the pandemic. We examined all visits to the three public safety net hospital EDs in Los Angeles County from April 2019 to February 2021. We performed interrupted time series analyses examining OUD-related ED visits from Period 1, April 2019 to February 2020, compared with Period 2, April 2020 to February 2021, by race/ethnicity and payor group. We considered OUD-related ED visits as those which included any of the following: discharge diagnosis related to OUD, patients administered buprenorphine or naloxone while in the ED, and visits where a patient was prescribed buprenorphine or naloxone on discharge. There were 5919 OUD-related ED visits in the sample. OUD-related visits increased by 4.43 (2.82-6.03) per 1000 encounters from the pre-COVID period (9.47 per 1000 in February 2020) to the COVID period (13.90 per 1000 in April 2020). This represented an increase of 0.41/1000 by white patients, 0.92/1000 by black patients, and 1.83/1000 by Hispanic patients. We found increases in OUD-related ED visits among patients with Medicaid managed care of 2.23/1000 and in LA County safety net patients by 3.95/1000 ED visits. OUD-related ED visits increased during the first year of the COVID pandemic. These increases were significant among black, white, and Hispanic patients, patients with Medicaid managed care, and LA County Safety net patients. These data suggest public emergency departments served as a stopgap for patients suffering from OUD in Los Angeles County during the pandemic and can be utilized to guide preventative interventions in vulnerable populations.

Multicentered study of patient outcomes after declined for early liver transplantation in severe alcohol-associated hepatitis.

BACKGROUND: Early liver transplantation for alcohol-associated hepatitis is controversial in part because patients may recover, and obviate the need for liver transplantation. METHODS: In this retrospective study among 5 ACCELERATE-AH sites, we randomly sampled patients evaluated and then declined for liver transplantation for alcohol-associated hepatitis. All had Model of End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) >20 and <6 months of abstinence. Recompensation was defined as MELD <15 without variceal bleeding, ascites, or overt HE requiring treatment. Multilevel mixed effects linear regression was used to calculate probabilities of recompensation; multivariable Cox regression was used for mortality analyses. RESULTS: Among 145 patients [61% men; median abstinence time and MELD-Na was 33 days (interquartile range: 13-70) and 31 (interquartile range: 26-36), respectively], 56% were declined for psychosocial reasons. Probability of 30-day, 90-day, 6-month, and 1-year survival were 76% (95% CI, 68%-82%), 59% (95% CI, 50%-66%), 49% (95% CI, 40%-57%), and 46% (95% CI, 37%-55%), respectively. Probability of 1-year recompensation was low at 10.0% (95% CI, 4.5%-15.4%). Among patients declined because of clinical improvement, 1-year probability of recompensation was 28.0% (95% CI, 5.7%-50.3%). Among survivors, median MELD-Na at 30 days, 90 days, and 1-year were 29 (interquartile range: 22-38), 19 (interquartile range : 14-29), and 11 (interquartile range : 7-17). Increased MELD-Na (adjusted HR: 1.13, p <0.001) and age (adjusted HR: 1.03, p <0.001) were associated with early (≤90 d) death, and only history of failed alcohol rehabilitation (adjusted HR: 1.76, p =0.02) was associated with late death. CONCLUSIONS: Liver recompensation is infrequent among severe alcohol-associated hepatitis patients declined for liver transplantation. Higher MELD-Na and age were associated with short-term mortality, whereas only history of failed alcohol rehabilitation was associated with long-term mortality. The distinction between survival and liver recompensation merits further attention.

Effect of Didactic Training on Barriers and Biases to Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: Meeting the Ongoing Needs of Patients with Opioid Use Disorder in the Emergency Department during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

In the wake of COVID-19, morbidity and mortality due to Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) is beginning to emerge as a second wave of deaths of despair. Medication assisted treatment (MAT) for opioid use disorder MAT delivered by Emergency Medicine (EM) providers can decrease mortality due to OUD; however, there are numerous cited barriers to MAT delivery. We examined the impact of MAT training on these barriers among EM residents in an urban, tertiary care facility with a large EM residency. Training included the scripted and standardized content from the Provider Clinical Support System curriculum. Residents completed pre- and post-training surveys on knowledge, barriers, and biases surrounding OUD. We performed Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test to detect statistical differences. Of 74 residents, 49 (66%) completed the pre-training survey, and 34 (69%) of these completed the follow-up survey. Residents reported improved preparedness to treat aspects of OUD across all areas queried, reported decreased perception of barriers to providing MAT, and increased comfort prescribing naloxone, counseling patients, prescribing buprenorphine, and treating opioid withdrawal. A didactic training on MAT was associated with residents reporting improved comfort providing buprenorphine and naloxone. As the wake of morbidity and mortality from both COVID and OUD continue to increase, programs should offer dedicated training on MAT.

Discordance in categorization of acute-on-chronic liver failure in the United Network for Organ Sharing database.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Studies regarding acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) among liver transplant (LT) candidates from the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database are being used to inform LT policy changes worldwide. We assessed the validity of identifying ACLF in UNOS. METHODS: We performed stratified random sampling among 3 US LT centers between 2013-2019 to obtain a representative patient sample across ACLF grades. We compared the concordance of ACLF classification by UNOS vs. blinded manual chart review, according to EASL-CLIF. RESULTS: Among 481 sampled LT registrants, 250 (52%) had no ACLF, 75 (16%) had ACLF grade 1, 79 (16%) had ACLF grade 2, and 77 (16%) had ACLF grade 3 per UNOS categorization. Concordance of ACLF grade by UNOS vs. chart review was: 72%, 64%, 56%, and 64% for no ACLF, grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3, respectively, with an overall Cohen's kappa coefficient of 0.48 (95% CI 0.42-0.54). Absence of acute decompensation was the most common reason for overestimation, and discordant brain and respiratory failure categorization were the most common reasons for underestimation of ACLF by UNOS. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective multi-center study, ACLF categorization by UNOS showed weak agreement with manual chart review. These findings are informative for ongoing allocation policy discussions, highlight the importance of prospective studies regarding ACLF in LT, and should encourage UNOS reform. LAY SUMMARY: Acute-on-chronic-liver-failure (ACLF) is a specific and common form of liver failure associated with high death rates. Studies have been published using the United States transplant registry (UNOS) to identify and describe outcomes of transplant candidates and recipients with ACLF, and these data are driving policy changes for transplant allocation around the world, but nobody has shown whether these data are reliable. We found that UNOS was not categorizing ACLF in concordance or accurately when compared to chart review, which shows the need for UNOS reform and non-UNOS studies to appropriately inform policies regarding the transplantation of patients with ACLF.

High-Dose Buprenorphine Induction in the Emergency Department for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder.

Importance: Emergency departments (EDs) sporadically use a high-dose buprenorphine induction strategy for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) in response to the increasing potency of the illicit opioid drug supply and commonly encountered delays in access to follow-up care. Objective: To examine the safety and tolerability of high-dose (>12 mg) buprenorphine induction for patients with OUD presenting to an ED. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this case series of ED encounters, data were manually abstracted from electronic health records for all ED patients with OUD treated with buprenorphine at a single, urban, safety-net hospital in Oakland, California, for the calendar year 2018. Data analysis was performed from April 2020 to March 2021. Interventions: ED physicians and advanced practice practitioners were trained on a high-dose sublingual buprenorphine induction protocol, which was then clinically implemented. Main Outcomes and Measures: Vital signs; use of supplemental oxygen; the presence of precipitated withdrawal, sedation, and respiratory depression; adverse events; length of stay; and hospitalization during and 24 hours after the ED visit were reported according to total sublingual buprenorphine dose (range, 2 to >28 mg). Results: Among a total of 391 unique patients (median [interquartile range] age, 36 [29-48] years), representing 579 encounters, 267 (68.3%) were male and 170 were (43.5%) Black. Homelessness (88 patients [22.5%]) and psychiatric disorders (161 patients [41.2%]) were common. A high dose of sublingual buprenorphine (>12 mg) was administered by 54 unique clinicians during 366 (63.2%) encounters, including 138 doses (23.8%) greater than or equal to 28 mg. No cases of respiratory depression or sedation were reported. All 5 (0.8%) cases of precipitated withdrawal had no association with dose; 4 cases occurred after doses of 8 mg of buprenorphine. Three serious adverse events unrelated to buprenorphine were identified. Nausea or vomiting was rare (2%-6% of cases). The median (interquartile range) length of stay was 2.4 (1.6-3.75) hours. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that high-dose buprenorphine induction, adopted by multiple clinicians in a single-site urban ED, was safe and well tolerated in patients with untreated OUD. Further prospective investigations conducted in multiple sites would enhance these findings.

Treatment of opioid and alcohol withdrawal in a cohort of emergency department patients.

BACKGROUND: The safety of combining buprenorphine with a benzodiazepine or barbiturate in the treatment of concurrent alcohol and opioid withdrawal has not been well established. In this study we examine a cohort of patients treated with buprenorphine and phenobarbital or benzodiazepines for co-occurring opioid and alcohol withdrawal. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of ED patients treated for opioid and alcohol withdrawal from January through December 2018. The primary outcome was unexpected airway intervention, or the administration of naloxone for respiratory depression. RESULTS: There were 16 patients treated for opioid and alcohol withdrawal. The mean age was 44.3 (standard deviation [SD] 13.1), 12 (75.0%) were male, and 8 (50.0%) of the patients were admitted to the hospital. For opioid withdrawal, six patients received intravenous buprenorphine, with doses between 0.3 mg to 1.8 mg; 12 patients received sublingual buprenorphine, with doses between 4 mg to 32 mg. For alcohol withdrawal, 10 patients received lorazepam with doses between 1 mg and 8 mg; 10 patients received phenobarbital with doses between 260 mg to 1040 mg. There were no unexpected airway interventions related to medications used for opioid or alcohol withdrawal. One patient with severe pneumonia was an expected intubation for respiratory failure. CONCLUSIONS: We describe a cohort of patients treated for opioid and alcohol withdrawal in the ED. There were no serious adverse events related to the medications used to treat opioid or alcohol withdrawal. Further work should assess optimal use of medical therapy for opioid and alcohol withdrawal and the transition to maintenance treatment for substance use disorders.