Risk Of Overdose Research Articles

Design and development of a machine-learning-driven opioid overdose risk prediction tool integrated in electronic health records in primary care settings

BackgroundIntegrating advanced machine-learning (ML) algorithms into clinical practice is challenging and requires interdisciplinary collaboration to develop transparent, interpretable, and ethically sound clinical decision support (CDS) tools. We aimed to design a ML-driven CDS tool to predict opioid overdose risk and gather feedback for its integration into the University of Florida Health (UFHealth) electronic health record (EHR) system.MethodsWe used user-centered design methods to integrate the ML algorithm into the EHR system. The backend and UI design sub-teams collaborated closely, both informed by user feedback sessions. We conducted seven user feedback sessions with five UF Health primary care physicians (PCPs) to explore aspects of CDS tools, including workflow, risk display, and risk mitigation strategies. After customizing the tool based on PCPs’ feedback, we held two rounds of one-on-one usability testing sessions with 8 additional PCPs to gather feedback on prototype alerts. These sessions informed iterative UI design and backend processes, including alert frequency and reappearance circumstances.ResultsThe backend process development identified needs and requirements from our team, information technology, UFHealth, and PCPs. Thirteen PCPs (male = 62%, White = 85%) participated across 7 user feedback sessions and 8 usability testing sessions. During the user feedback sessions, PCPs (n = 5) identified flaws such as the term “high risk” of overdose potentially leading to unintended consequences (e.g., immediate addiction services referrals), offered suggestions, and expressed trust in the tool. In the first usability testing session, PCPs (n = 4) emphasized the need for natural risk presentation (e.g., 1 in 200) and suggested displaying the alert multiple times yearly for at-risk patients. Another 4 PCPs in the second usability testing session valued the UFHealth-specific alert for managing new or unfamiliar patients, expressed concerns about PCPs’ workload when prescribing to high-risk patients, and recommended incorporating the details page into training sessions to enhance usability.ConclusionsThe final backend process for our CDS alert aligns with PCP needs and UFHealth standards. Integrating feedback from PCPs in the early development phase of our ML-driven CDS tool helped identify barriers and facilitators in the CDS integration process. This collaborative approach yielded a refined prototype aimed at minimizing unintended consequences and enhancing usability.

M-Eslon (morphine) ER capsules recalled due to risk of overdose

M-Eslon (morphine) ER capsules recalled due to risk of overdose

Predicting buprenorphine adherence among patients with opioid use disorder in primary care settings

BackgroundMedications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including buprenorphine, are effective treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) and reduce risk for overdose and death. Buprenorphine can be prescribed in outpatient primary care settings to treat OUD; however, prior research suggests adherence to buprenorphine in these settings can be low. The purpose of this study was to identify the rates of and factors associated with buprenorphine adherence among patients with OUD in the first six months after a new start of buprenorphine.MethodsData were extracted from the electronic health record (EHR) from a large integrated health system in the upper Midwest. Patients with OUD (N = 345; Mean age = 37.6 years, SD 13.2; 61.7% male; 78% White) with a new start of buprenorphine between March 2019 and July 2021 were included in the analysis. Buprenorphine adherence in the first six months was defined using medication orders; the proportion of days covered (PDC) with a standard cut-point of 80% was used to classify patients as adherent or non-adherent. Demographic (e.g., age, sex, race and ethnicity, geographic location), service (e.g., encounters, buprenorphine formulations and dosage) and clinical (e.g., diagnoses, urine toxicology screens) characteristics were examined as factors that could be related to adherence. Analyses included logistic regression with adherence group as a binary outcome.ResultsLess than half of patients were classified as adherent to buprenorphine (44%). Adjusting for other factors, male sex (OR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.20, 0.57, p < .001) and having an unexpected positive for opioids on urine toxicology (OR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.21, 0.83, p < .014) were associated with lower likelihood of adherence to buprenorphine, whereas being a former smoker (compared to a current smoker; OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.02, 3.27, p = .014) was associated with greater likelihood of being adherent to buprenorphine.ConclusionsThese results suggest that buprenorphine adherence in primary care settings may be low, yet male sex and smoking status are associated with adherence rates. Future research is needed to identify the mechanisms through which these factors are associated with adherence.

Engagement in substance use disorder treatment after an emergency department visit among persons at high risk of opioid overdose: A prediction analysis

BackgroundCertified peer recovery specialists (CPRS) and licensed clinical social workers (LCSWs) can facilitate substance use disorder (SUD) treatment engagement for emergency department (ED) patients at risk for overdose. Predictors of treatment engagement after such behavioral services are unknown. MethodsThis secondary analysis included Rhode Island ED patients at high risk for opioid overdose participating in a randomized controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of CPRS and LCSWs services (2018–2021). SUD treatment engagement within 90 days post-discharge was identified using statewide administrative data. Potential predictors were obtained from baseline questionnaires. Classification and regression trees (CART) were used to identify predictors of treatment engagement. ResultsIn the ED, 323 and 325 participants received CPRS and LCSWs services, respectively, among whom 141 (43.7 %) and 137 (42.2 %) engaged in SUD treatment within 90 days post-discharge. For the CPRS group, predictors of treatment engagement included unhealthy alcohol use, prescription opioid or benzodiazepine use in past 6 months, and lifetime history of: unstable housing, barriers to treatment, bipolar disorder diagnosis, addiction treatment, and recovery services. In the LCSW group, predictors included health insurance, current pain, opioid overdose in past year, and lifetime history of anxiety disorder diagnosis and mental illness treatment. However, CART had low predictive accuracy (CPRS: 60.9 %, LCSW: 54.8 %). ConclusionsAmong ED patients at high risk of opioid overdose receiving behavioral services, 90-day SUD treatment engagement was high. Sociobehavioral and clinical patient characteristics did not accurately predict treatment engagement. Behavioral services should be offered to all ED patients at high risk of opioid overdose.

Overdose as a complex contagion: modelling the community spread of overdose events following law enforcement efforts to disrupt the drug market

BackgroundThe opioid overdose mortality crisis in the USA is an ongoing public health epidemic. Ongoing law enforcement strategies to disrupt local unregulated drug markets can have an iatrogenic effect of...

Iron-MOFs for Biomedical Applications.

Over the past two decades, iron-based metal-organic frameworks (Fe-MOFs) have attracted significant research interest in biomedicine due to their low toxicity, tunable degradability, substantial drug loading capacity, versatile structures, and multimodal functionalities. Despite their great potential, the transition of Fe-MOFs-based composites from laboratory research to clinical products remains challenging. This review evaluates the key properties that distinguish Fe-MOFs from other MOFs and highlights recent advances in synthesis routes, surface engineering, and shaping technologies. In particular, it focuses on their applications in biosensing, antimicrobial, and anticancer therapies. In addition, the review emphasizes the need to develop scalable, environmentally friendly, and cost-effective production methods for additional Fe-MOFs to meet the specific requirements of various biomedical applications. Despite the ability of Fe-MOFs-based composites to combine therapies, significant hurdles still remain, including the need for a deeper understanding of their therapeutic mechanisms and potential risks of resistance and overdose. Systematically addressing these challenges could significantly enhance the prospects of Fe-MOFs in biomedicine and potentially facilitate their integration into mainstream clinical practice.

Low-dose methadone added to another opioid for cancer pain: a multicentre prospective study

ContextThe use of methadone for cancer pain management is gaining wider acceptance. However, switching to methadone treatment can still pose challenges. Consequently, there is ongoing development of its use in low doses in combination with other opioids, despite a lack of clinical evidence regarding its efficacy and safety.ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of low-dose methadone in combination with another opioid in patients with moderate-to-severe cancer-related pain in a clinical setting.Patients and methodsThis was a prospective, open-label study conducted in 19 pain and/or palliative care centres treating patients with cancer-related pain. Pain intensity, patients' global impression of change, and adverse effects were assessed on day 7 and day 14. The main outcome measure was the proportion of responders.ResultsThe study included 92 patients. The daily dose of methadone was 3 [3–6] mg at baseline, 9 [4–10] mg on day 7 and 10 [6–15] mg on day 14. The NRS pain ratings significantly decreased from 7 [6–8] at baseline to 5 [3–6] on visit 2 (p < .0001) and 4 [3–6] on visit 3 (p < .0001). Similarly, the VRS pain ratings decreased from 3 [3–3] at baseline to 2 [2–3] on visit 2 (p = 0.026) and 2 [1–3] (p < 0.001) on visit 3. At Visits 1 and 2, half of the patients were considered Responders. Of those responders, 73.5% were High-Responders at Visit 1 and 58.7% were High-Responders at Visit 2. No adverse events related to the risk of QT prolongation, overdose, or drug interactions were reported.ConclusionFor patients experiencing moderate to severe cancer-related pain despite initial opioid treatment, our study found that low-dose methadone, when used in combination with another opioid, was both safe and effective. This supports the use of methadone as an adjunct to opioid-based treatment for cancer pain.

A community-academic partnership to develop an implementation support package for overdose prevention in permanent supportive housing

IntroductionThe overdose crisis in the U.S. disproportionately impacts people experiencing homelessness. Permanent supportive housing (PSH) – permanent, affordable housing with voluntary support services – is an effective, evidence-based intervention to address homelessness. However, overdose risk remains high even after entering PSH for individual and structural reasons. In this study, we aimed to refine a set of evidence-based overdose prevention practices (EBPs) and an associated implementation support package for PSH settings using focus groups with PSH tenants, frontline staff, and leaders. MethodsOur community-academic team identified an initial set of overdose EBPs applicable for PSH through research, public health guidance, and a needs assessment. We adapted these practices based on feedback from focus groups with PSH leaders, staff, and tenants. Focus groups followed semi-structured interview guides developed using the EPIS (Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment) framework constructs of inner context, outer context, and bridging factors related to overdose prevention and response. ResultsWe conducted 16 focus groups with 40 unique participants (14 PSH tenants, 15 PSH staff, 11 PSH leaders); focus groups were held in two iterative rounds and individuals could participate in one or both rounds. Participants were diverse in gender, race, and ethnicity. Focus group participants were enthusiastic about the proposed EBPs and implementation strategies, while contributing unique insights and concrete suggestions to improve upon them. The implementation support package contains an iteratively refined PSH Overdose Prevention (POP) Toolkit with 20 EBPs surrounding overdose prevention and response, harm reduction, and support for substance use treatment and additional core implementation strategies including practice facilitation, tenant-staff champion teams, and learning collaboratives. ConclusionsThis manuscript describes how robust community-academic partnerships and input from people with lived experience as tenants and staff in PSH informed adaptation of evidence-based overdose prevention approaches and implementation strategies to improve their fit for PSH settings. This effort can inform similar efforts nationally in other settings serving highly marginalized populations. We are currently conducting a randomized trial of the refined overdose prevention implementation support package in PSH.

"Before medically advised" hospital discharge and the risk of subsequent drug overdose: A case-crossover analysis.

Patient-initiated or "before medically advised" (BMA) hospital discharge is more common among people who use drugs. Transitions of care can be destabilizing and might increase the risk of subsequent illicit drug overdose. This study sought to evaluate whether BMA discharge is associated with an increased risk of subsequent drug overdose (primary objective) and whether physician-advised discharge is associated with an increased risk of subsequent drug overdose (secondary objective). We performed a case-crossover analysis of population-based linked administrative health data for individuals experiencing an overdose between 2016 and 2019 in British Columbia, Canada. Using conditional logistic regression, we compared the likelihood of hospital discharge in the 28 days before overdose (the "pre-overdose interval") to the likelihood of hospital discharge in two self-matched 28-day control intervals ending 26 and 52 weeks before overdose. Over the 3.5-year study interval, 235 of 27,584 (0.9%) pre-overdose intervals and 189 of 55,168 (0.3%) control intervals included a BMA discharge, suggesting that BMA discharge was associated with a twofold increase in the risk of subsequent drug overdose (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.08; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.68-2.58; p < 0.001). Physician-advised hospital discharge was also a risk factor for subsequent overdose, occurring in 1350 of 27,584 (4.9%) pre-overdose intervals and 1625 of 55,168 (2.9%) control intervals (aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.27-1.52; p < .001). Both BMA and physician-advised hospital discharge are independently associated with transient increases in the risk of subsequent illicit drug overdose. Better in-hospital treatment of substance use disorder and novel means of post-discharge outreach should be deployed to reduce this risk.

Implementation of a peer-delivered opioid overdose response initiative in New York City emergency departments: Insight from multi-stakeholder qualitative interviews

BackgroundEmergency departments (EDs) are critical touchpoints for overdose prevention efforts. In New York City (NYC), the Health Department's Relay initiative dispatches trained peer “Wellness Advocates” (WAs) to engage with patients in EDs after an overdose and for up to 90 days subsequently. Interest in peer-delivered interventions for patients at risk for overdose has grown nationally, but few studies have explored challenges and opportunities related to implementing such interventions in EDs. MethodsWe conducted in-depth interviews with Relay WAs, ED patients, and ED providers across 4 diverse NYC EDs. Sampling was purposeful and continued until theoretical saturation was reached. Interviews followed a semi-structured interview guide based on key domains from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were conducted by telephone or web conferencing; audio recordings were professionally transcribed. The study utilized rapid qualitative analysis using template summaries and summary matrices followed by line-by-line coding conducted independently by 3 researchers, then discussed and harmonized at group coding meetings. Coding was both inductive (using an a priori code list based on CFIR domains and study goals) and deductive (new codes allowed to emerge from transcripts). Dedoose software was used for data organization. ResultsWe conducted 32 in-depth interviews (10 WAs, 12 patients, 10 ED providers). Four overarching themes emerged: 1) EDs are characterized by multiple competing demands (e.g., related to provider time and physical space), underscoring the utility of Relay and leading to some practical challenges for its delivery; 2) There is a strong role distinction of WAs as peers with lived experience; 3) ED providers value Relay, even though they have a limited understanding of its full scope and outcomes; 4) While the role of structural factors (e.g., homelessness and unstable housing) is recognized, responsibility is often placed on patients for controlling their own success. ConclusionsWe identified four themes that shed new light on the implementation of peer-based overdose prevention programs in EDs. Our findings highlight unique ED inner and outer setting factors that may impact program implementation and effectiveness. The findings provide actionable information to inform implementation of similar programs nationally.

Fentanyl, Heroin, Methamphetamine, and Cocaine Analyte Concentrations in Urine Drug Testing Specimens

The US is experiencing a protracted drug overdose crisis primarily associated with exposure to illicitly manufactured fentanyl (IMF), methamphetamine, and cocaine. Overdose risk and treatment responses may be directly affected by absolute drug exposure concentrations and drug use prevalence. To quantify changes in absolute drug exposure concentrations from 2013 to 2023. This cross-sectional study analyzed urine drug testing (UDT) results from urine specimens collected between January 1, 2013, and August 22, 2023, in 49 states and the District of Columbia. Urine specimens were obtained from patients aged 18 years or older who presented to substance use disorder treatment clinics. The UDT was ordered by clinicians based on medical necessity. Urine specimens were analyzed for the following drugs or metabolites (analytes tested in parentheses): fentanyl (fentanyl), heroin (6-monoacetylmorphine), cocaine (benzoylecgonine), and methamphetamine (methamphetamine) using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Relative concentrations of fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine. Creatinine-normalized drug concentration values were log-transformed prior to visualization and statistical analyses. The Mann-Kendall trend test was performed to examine trends over time. To estimate the geospatial and temporal patterns of drug concentration, a second series of models (1 for each drug) with an interaction effect for clinic location and collection year were fit. A total of 921 931 unique UDT samples were collected from patients (549 042 males [59.6%]; median [IQR] age, 34 [27-44] years). The adjusted fentanyl concentration in urine specimens was 38.23 (95% CI, 35.93-40.67) ng/mg creatinine in 2023 and 4.61 (95% CI, 3.59-5.91) ng/mg creatinine in 2013. The adjusted methamphetamine concentration was 3461.59 (95% CI, 3271.88-3662.30) ng/mg creatinine in 2023 and 665.27 (95% CI, 608.51-727.32) ng/mg creatinine in 2013. The adjusted cocaine concentration was 1122.23 (95% CI, 1032.41-1219.87) ng/mg creatinine in 2023 and 559.71 (95% CI, 524.69-597.06) ng/mg creatinine in 2013. The adjusted heroin concentration was 58.36 (95% CI, 48.26-70.58) ng/mg creatinine in 2023 and 146.59 (95% CI, 136.06-157.92) ng/mg creatinine in 2013. Drug concentrations varied across US Census divisions. This cross-sectional study found that absolute concentrations of fentanyl, methamphetamine, and cocaine in urine specimens increased from 2013 to 2023, with a decrease in heroin concentration during that period. The findings suggest that exposure to these substances, as well as the illicit drug supply, has fundamentally changed in many parts of the US, highlighting the need to reinforce surveillance initiatives and accelerate efforts to treat individuals with IMF and/or stimulant exposure.

Reevaluating ADHD and its First-Line Treatment: Insights from DSM-5-TR and Modern Approaches.

Is Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) a "brain disorder"? Should it be managed regularly with stimulant drugs? This article critically examines the evolving biomedical discourse surrounding these questions through a close inspection of the latest edition of the influential psychiatric manual - the DSM-5-TR - as well as additional authoritative sources (e.g., previous DSM editions, consensus statements, FDA communications). The DSM-5-TR acknowledges that "no biological marker is diagnostic for ADHD" and that "meta-analyses of all neuroimaging studies do not show differences between individuals with ADHD and control subjects." The authors of the DSM-5-TR, therefore, conclude that "until these issues are resolved, no form of neuroimaging can be used for diagnosis of ADHD." These statements, along with biases in the neuroimaging literature and additional empirical evidence presented in the article, challenge popular myths about the neurobiological basis of ADHD. Similarly, common beliefs about the first-line treatment of ADHD with stimulant drugs are being increasingly questioned today. For instance, the DSM-5-TR's section on Stimulant-Related Disorders introduces a new diagnostic entity named: Stimulant-Induced Mild Neurocognitive Disorder. This addition aligns with a recent FDA Drug Safety Communication for "all prescription stimulants," which highlights longstanding concerns regarding the safety of medications prescribed to millions of diagnosed individuals, primarily children. The FDA now mandates that "the Boxed Warning, FDA's most prominent warning, will describe the risks of misuse, abuse, addiction, and overdose," emphasizing that such "misuse and abuse of prescription stimulants can result in overdose and death." In light of these challenges to the biomedical discourse, this article offers a neurodiversity-oriented alternative. Using evolutionary principles and historical context, it argues that most cases of ADHD fall under the DSM's socio-philosophical category of "conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society" (similar to homosexuality, which was removed from the DSM in 1973), and are therefore "not mental disorders".

The Emergent Role of Low-Dose Naltrexone in the Symptomatic Management of Chronic Musculoskeletal and Neuropathic Pain

As a result of the intricate mechanisms of pain transmission, traditional analgesics used alone, as well as concomitantly, often do not provide consistent and/or adequate pain relief for patients suffering with chronic pain conditions. Many analgesics, as well as antineuropathic and antispastic drugs, demonstrate synergistic CNS side effects, increasing the risk of respiratory depression and overdose when used in combination. Given the steady rise of opioid-related overdose deaths in the USA, pursuit of novel treatment options, such as low dose naltrexone (LDN) regimens, are of particular interest to researchers. Although multiple reliable studies exist which demonstrate the potential for LDN in pain management, large-scale, high-quality studies are lacking, or are in progress. This review article aims to analyze the currently available literature regarding low dose naltrexone therapy in order to evaluate its potential role in the management of chronic inflammatory, neuropathic, and generalized pain symptoms. Although promising, available data is limited in its utility, warranting further research and development regarding the clinical role and place in therapy of LDN in chronic pain management.

Take-home naloxone in multicentre emergency settings: the TIME feasibility cluster RCT.

Opioids kill more people than any other drug. Naloxone is an opioid antagonist which can be distributed in take-home 'kits' for peer administration (take-home naloxone). To determine the feasibility of carrying out a definitive randomised controlled trial of take-home naloxone in emergency settings. We used Welsh routine data (2015-21) to test the feasibility of developing a discriminant function to identify people at high risk of fatal opioid overdose. We carried out a cluster randomised controlled trial and qualitative study to examine experiences of service users and providers. We assessed feasibility of intervention and trial methods against predetermined progression criteria related to: site sign-up, staff trained, identification of eligible patients, proportion given kits, identification of people who died of opioid poisoning, data linkage and retrieval of outcomes. This study was carried out in the emergency environment; sites comprised an emergency department and associated ambulance service catchment area. At intervention sites, we invited emergency department clinicians and paramedics to participate. We recruited adult patients who arrived at the emergency department or were attended to by ambulance paramedics for a problem related to opioid use with capacity to consent to receiving the take-home naloxone and related training. Usual care comprised basic life support plus naloxone by paramedics or emergency department staff. The take-home naloxone intervention was offered in addition to usual care, with guidance for recipients on basic life support, the importance of calling the emergency services, duration of effect, safety and legality of naloxone administration. With low numbers of opioid-related deaths (1105/3,227,396) and a high proportion having no contact with health services in the year before death, the predictive link between death and opioid-related healthcare events was weak. Logistic regression models indicated we would need to monitor one-third of the population to capture 75% of the decedents from opioid overdose in 1-year follow-up. Four sites participated in the trial and 299 of 687 (44%) eligible clinical staff were trained. Sixty take-home naloxone kits were supplied to patients during 1-year recruitment. Eligible patients were not offered take-home naloxone kits 164 times: 'forgot' (n = 136); 'too busy' (n = 15); suspected intentional overdose (n = 3). Service users had high levels of knowledge about take-home naloxone. They were supportive of the intervention but noted concerns about opioid withdrawal and resistance to attending hospital for an overdose. Service providers were positive about the intervention but reported barriers including difficulty with consenting and training high-risk opioid users. We were able to calculate costs to train staff at three sites (£40 per AS and £17 in Site 1 ED). No adverse events were reported. Progression criteria were not met - fewer than 50% of eligible staff were trained, fewer than 50% of eligible patients received the intervention and outcomes were not retrieved within reasonable timescales. The take-home naloxone intervention needs to be developed and evaluated in emergency care settings, with appropriate methods. The Take-home naloxone Intervention Multicentre Emergency setting study was interrupted by coronavirus disease. This study did not meet progression criteria for intervention or trial methods feasibility, so outcomes were not followed up and a fully powered trial is not planned. This trial is registered as ISRCTN13232859. This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/91/04) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 74. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Buprenorphine, oxycodone, hydrocodone, and methadone mortality in the United States (2010‒2017).

Opioid overdose survivors present to emergency departments (EDs) and many EDs have developed programs to initiate buprenorphine. The impact of the increasing use of buprenorphine in ED and by other providers is unknown while opioid mortality continues to rise. Public mortality data do not distinguish buprenorphine from other prescription opioids. Our objective was to determine when changes in overdose mortality trends occurred comparing deaths involving buprenorphine to oxycodone, hydrocodone, and methadone. This observational study utilized the drug-involved mortality database including US death certificates (2010‒2017) in which buprenorphine, oxycodone, hydrocodone, or methadone were contributing causes of death (determined through textual analysis). Population- and drug utilization-adjusted mortality rates were examined using disjointed linear regression. Buprenorphine-involved deaths were stratified by polysubstance involvement. The population-adjusted mortality rates for buprenorphine-involved deaths were lowest compared to other opioids; however, the change in rate for buprenorphine increased faster than oxycodone, hydrocodone, and methadone at 8.9% each quarter-year (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.0, 9.8) from 2010 to mid-2016 when it stabilized. After adjusting for changes in dispensing over the study period, buprenorphine-involved mortality rates were increasing at 5.3% (95% CI: 4.6, 6.1) each quarter-year. In 2017, 94% buprenorphine-involved deaths had at least one other drug contributing to the cause of death. Given the low mortality, high proportions of polysubstance mortality, and the mixed agonist/antagonist mechanism of action, use of buprenorphine alone likely presents a lower risk for overdose than comparators. Mortality rose faster than dispensing, signaling need to ensure people understand buprenorphine risks, particularly polysubstance use, balanced against importance for treating opioid use disorders.

419 Determinants of Opioid Overdose Risk in the COVID-19 Era

419 Determinants of Opioid Overdose Risk in the COVID-19 Era

Chronic Opioid Use Following Implementation of Oregon's Medicaid Back Pain Policy

IntroductionIn 2016, Oregon developed an innovative policy to improve care for Medicaid patients with back pain. The objective of this study was to identify factors associated with dose reduction and discontinuation among Medicaid patients using chronic opioid therapy following implementation of this policy. MethodsUsing Medicaid administrative claims data, this was a retrospective cohort of patients on chronic stable opioid therapy between July and December 2016. Outcomes assessed were 1) 30% reduction in opioid dose and 2) an absolute discontinuation between January to December 2017. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated association between dose reduction outcomes and clinical and demographic factors. ResultsOf 4,643 Medicaid patients on chronic opioid therapy, 3853 (83%) had a dose reduction and 651 (14%) discontinued opioids; patients with back pain were more likely to have a dose reduction (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.19; 95% 1.01 to 1.41). Factors associated with discontinuation included having a mental health diagnosis (aOR 1.30; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.56), substance use disorder (aOR 1.90; 95% CI 1.41 to 2.56), opioid use disorder (aOR 1.55; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.99), and receipt of buprenorphine (aOR 2.82; 95% CI 1.30 to 6.15). Discontinuation was less likely in Black patients (aOR 0.50; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.85), in older age groups, and in those with a higher opioid dose at baseline. ConclusionsMost Medicaid beneficiaries had a dose reduction following implementation of Oregon's back pain policy. Opioid discontinuation was associated with factors that suggest providers pursue this strategy for patients at higher overdose risk.

Predictors of future overdose among people who inject drugs in Baltimore, Maryland

BackgroundLongitudinal studies of future overdose risk among people who inject drugs (PWID) are needed to inform planning of targeted overdose preventions in the United States. MethodsThe Integrating Services to Improve Treatment and Engagement (INSITE) study followed 720 PWID between June 2018 and August 2019 to evaluate the delivery of mobilized healthcare services in Baltimore, Maryland. The present analyses used logistic regression to identify baseline characteristics predictive of non-fatal or fatal overdose during the 6-month follow-up among 507 participants with overdose information. Non-fatal overdoses were self-reported and fatal overdoses were identified through the National Death Index. ResultsAt baseline, 121 (23 %) reported an overdose in the prior 6 months. Between baseline and follow-up, 66 (13 %) participants reported a non-fatal overdose and 6 (1 %) experienced a fatal overdose. Overdose during follow-up was positively associated with overdose in the 6 months prior to baseline (6.70 aOR; 95 % CI: 3.51, 12.78) and more than 6 months prior to baseline (2.49 aOR; 95 % CI: 1.52, 4.08) versus no prior overdose. Overdose during follow-up was also positively associated with buprenorphine treatment (2.37 aOR; CI: 1.08, 5.21) and negatively associated with non-prescribed methadone at baseline (0.59 aOR; 0.38, 0.93). ConclusionsIdentifying and intervening with PWID who experienced a recent overdose could reduce short-term elevated risk of future overdose. However, as other PWID reported never experiencing an overdose at baseline nonetheless experienced an overdose during follow-up, targeted approaches should be complemented with population-level interventions. Overdose risk implications of buprenorphine treatment and non-prescribed methadone are also discussed.

Semaglutide and Opioid Overdose Risk in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Opioid Use Disorder.

This cohort study uses emulation target trial methods to evaluate whether semaglutide is associated with lower rates of opioid overdose among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and opioid use disorder (OUD).

"Before medically advised" departure from hospital and subsequent drug overdose: a population-based cohort study.

A substantial number of hospital admissions end in patient-initiated departure before medical treatment is complete. Whether "before medically advised" (BMA) discharge increases the risk of subsequent drug overdose remains uncertain. We performed a retrospective cohort study using administrative health data from a 20% random sample of residents of British Columbia, Canada. We focused on nonelective, nonobstetric hospital stays occurring between 2015 and 2019. We used survival analysis to compare the rate of fatal or nonfatal illicit drug overdose in the first 30 days after BMA discharge versus the rate after physician-advised discharge. Overall, 6440 of 189 808 (3.4%) hospital stays ended in BMA discharge. Among 820 overdoses occurring in the first 30 days after any hospital discharge, 755 (92%) involved patients with a history of substance use disorder. Unadjusted overdose rates were 10-fold higher after BMA discharge than after physician-advised discharge, and BMA discharge was associated with subsequent overdose even after adjustment for potential confounders (crude incidence, 2.8% v. 0.3%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-1.89). Before medically advised discharge was associated with increases in subsequent emergency department visits (adjusted HR 1.92; 95% CI 1.83-2.02) and unplanned hospital readmissions (adjusted HR 2.07; 95% CI 1.96-2.19), but there was no significant association with the uncommon outcomes of fatal overdose and all-cause mortality. Before medically advised departure is associated with an increased risk of drug overdose in the first 30 days after discharge. Improved treatment of substance use disorder, expanded access to overdose prevention services, and new means of postdeparture outreach should be explored to reduce this risk.