Take-home Naloxone Research Articles

Point-of-care naloxone distribution in the emergency department: A pilot study.

Opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) for use by laypersons has been shown to be safe and effective, but implementation in the emergency department (ED) setting is challenging. Recent literature has shown a discouragingly low rate of obtainment of naloxone that is prescribed in the ED setting. We conducted a study to evaluate the feasibility of point-of-care (POC) distribution of naloxone in an ED, hypothesizing a rate of obtainment higher than prescription fill rates reported in previous studies. A multidisciplinary team of experts, including pharmacists, physicians, nurses, and case management professionals used an iterative process to develop a protocol for POC OEND in the ED. The protocol includes 5 steps: (1) patient screening, (2) order placement in the electronic health record (EHR), (3) a patient training video, (4) dispensing of naloxone kit, and (5) written discharge instructions. The naloxone kits were assembled, labeled to meet requirements for a prescription, and stored in an automated dispensing cabinet. Two pharmacists, 30 attending physicians, 65 resident physicians, and 108 nurses were trained. In 8 months, 134 orders for take-home naloxone were entered and 117 naloxone kits were dispensed, resulting in an obtainment rate of 87.3%. The indication for take-home naloxone kit was heroin use for 61 patients (92.4%). POC naloxone distribution is feasible and yielded a rate of obtainment significantly higher than previous studies in which naloxone was prescribed. POC distribution can be replicated at other hospitals with low rates of obtainment.

What Is Known about Community Pharmacy-Based Take-Home Naloxone Programs and Program Interventions? A Scoping Review.

A variety of new sources describing community pharmacy-based take-home naloxone (THN) programs have emerged recently in the literature. There is a need to define the types of take-home naloxone programs being offered to support future research designs in implementing and evaluating standardized programs that fill pharmacist and patient knowledge gaps and lift current barriers for optimal community pharmacy naloxone provision. The objective of this paper is to summarize the literature on community pharmacy-based THN programs, including specific program interventions used to increase naloxone dispensing, naloxone availability and dispensing patterns, facilitators and barriers for the THN programs, and knowledge gaps. Online databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and International Pharmaceutical s (IPA) and a search of the grey literature were used to identify eligible sources. Sources were screened by two reviewers for eligibility in COVIDENCE software. Both reviewers compared screening results and resolved conflicts through discussion. A data extraction form for all identified full texts was completed by both reviewers and results were compiled through reviewer discussion. Fifty-two sources met the eligibility criteria. The top three barriers identified were: cost/coverage of naloxone, stigma, and education/training for pharmacists. THN program interventions included screening tools, checklists, pocket cards, patient brochures, and utilizing the pharmacy management system to flag eligible patients. Patient knowledge gaps included naloxone misinformation and lack of awareness, while pharmacists demonstrated administrative, clinical, and counselling knowledge gaps. Naloxone availability was found to be highly variable, where independent and rural pharmacies were less likely to stock or dispense naloxone. Further, pharmacies located in districts with higher rates of opioid overdose deaths and lower household income were also less likely to have naloxone available. This review identified multiple new programs, showcasing that the implementation and evaluation of THN programs are an expanding area of research. Future research should focus on implementing and evaluating a THN program through a randomized controlled trial design that incorporates solutions for the barriers and knowledge gaps identified in this study.

Managing Nonmedical Opioid Use Among Patients With Cancer Pain During the COVID-19 Pandemic Using the CHAT Model and Telehealth

Managing Nonmedical Opioid Use Among Patients With Cancer Pain During the COVID-19 Pandemic Using the CHAT Model and Telehealth

Overdoselifesavers.org: a mixed-method evaluation of a public information website on experiences of overdose and using take-home naloxone to save lives

Aims Overdoselifesavers.org was created as part of a larger Australian research project investigating impediments to take-home naloxone uptake. The aim of the project was to create a resource to enhance public and professional understandings of take-home naloxone and to counter stigmatising misconceptions about overdose. This article presents the findings of a mixed-method evaluation of Overdoselifesavers.org that assesses its success in achieving these goals. Methods Following an established approach, three data sources were analysed: (1) the reach of the website (website analytics); (2) website audience response (evaluation survey); and (3) other indicators of use and impact (including social media referrals and organisational links). Findings In the 10-week evaluation period, Overdoselifesavers.org had 1769 unique visitors. Responses to the survey praised the website as a means of challenging stereotypes and supporting take-home naloxone uptake. Twenty-two organisations had linked to the website and 324 social media referrals were recorded. Conclusions These data indicate that Overdoselifesavers.org has begun connecting with audiences and enhancing knowledge about and support for take-home naloxone. Continually building engagement and use of the website outside the alcohol and other drug sector warrants ongoing attention. Further research on developing suitable evaluation methods for novel initiatives such as research-based public websites is needed.

Death after emergency department visits for opioid overdose in British Columbia: a retrospective cohort analysis.

Background:Visits to the emergency department are critical opportunities to engage individuals after an overdose. We sought to estimate and compare the 12-month mortality between persons with visits to the emergency department related to opioid overdose and those with non-overdose-related visits.Methods:We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Provincial Overdose Cohort, which contains data for patients in British Columbia who had an opioid-related overdose between 2015 and 2017, along with a 20% random sample of BC residents for comparison. We examined all nonfatal visits to the emergency department between Jan. 1, 2015, and Dec. 31, 2016, among persons aged 14 to 74 years and compared the 12-month mortality between those with overdose-related visits and those with non-overdose-related visits. We estimated the hazard ratio for death, with adjustment for age, sex, comorbidity and disposition (discharged or left against medical advice).Results:We included 3593 persons with overdose-related visits and 216 453 with non-overdose-related visits to the emergency department. Those with overdose-related visits were younger, were predominantly male and had more mental health conditions. The 12-month crude mortality probability was 5.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.7%–6.2%) in this group and 1.7% (95% CI 1.6%–1.8%) among those with non-overdose-related visits. After adjustment, for persons who were discharged, the 12-month mortality hazard was 3.5 (95% CI 3.0–4.2) times higher among those with overdose-related visits than those with non-overdose-related visits. For persons who left against medical advice, the mortality hazard was 7.1 (95% CI 4.0–12.5) times higher among those with opioid overdose.Interpretation:Among persons with overdose-related visits to the emergency department, 12-month mortality was higher than among those with non-overdose-related visits. Overdose-related visits should prompt urgent evidence-based interventions (e.g., take-home naloxone kits, buprenorphine–naloxone induction) to prevent future deaths.

Community pharmacy pilot provides hundreds of take-home naloxone kits in one year

Community pharmacy pilot provides hundreds of take-home naloxone kits in one year

Coding and classification of heroin overdose calls by MPDS dispatch software: Implications for bystander response with naloxone

Background and aimsTake-home naloxone, a key response to heroin overdose, may be compromised by the way in which overdose cases are coded in EMS dispatch systems as call-takers direct callers at cardiac arrest events against using any medication. We examined the ways in which confirmed heroin overdose cases attended by ambulances are coded at dispatch to determine whether incorrect coding of overdoses as cardiac arrests may limit the use of take-home naloxone. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of coded ambulance clinical records collected in Victoria, Australia from 2012–2017. Counts of heroin overdose cases were examined by dispatch coding (heroin overdose, cardiac/respiratory arrest and ‘other’), along with age, sex, GCS and respiratory rate. Data were analysed using chi-square and Poisson regression for quarterly counts, adjusting for age, sex and patient GCS. ResultsA total of 5637 heroin overdose cases were attended over the period 2012–2017 (71.4% male, 36.4% aged under 35 years). Almost half (n = 2674, 47.4%) were coded as cardiac/respiratory arrest at dispatch, with 36.8% (n = 2075) coded as heroin overdose and 15.7% (n = 886) coded as other/unknown. Discussion and conclusionsAlmost half of the heroin overdoses were dispatched according to a protocol that would preclude the use of take-home naloxone prior to ambulance arrival and this changed little over the period in which take-home naloxone programs were operating in Victoria, Australia. EMS should move as quickly as possible to newer versions of dispatch systems that enable the use of naloxone in cases of obvious opioid overdose that may be classified as cardiac/respiratory arrest.

With crisis comes opportunity: Unanticipated benefits resulting from pivots to take-home naloxone (THN) programs during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in stay-at-home orders, which presented a significant challenge to the design and operation of an essential harm-reduction strategy in the opioid epidemic: community-based, take-home naloxone (THN) programs. This commentary describes how four rural and/or Appalachian communities quickly pivoted their existing THN programs to respond to community need. These pivots, which reflect both the context of each community and the capacities of its service delivery and technology platforms, resulted in enhancements to THN training and distribution that have maintained or expanded the reach of their efforts. Additionally, all four community pivots are both highly sustainable and transferrable to other communities planning to or currently implementing THN training and distribution programs.

Stakeholders' Perceptions of Factors Influencing the Use of Take-Home-Naloxone.

Background and Aims: Opioid associated death and overdose is a growing burden in societies all over the world. In recent years, legislative changes have increased access to naloxone in the take-home setting for use by patients with a substance use disorder and bystanders, to prevent opioid overdose deaths. However, few studies have explored the factors influencing the uptake by its multiple stakeholders. The aim of this scoping review was to explore the factors influencing the use of take-home naloxone from the perspectives of different stakeholders. Methods: A scoping review methodology was adopted with a systematic search of databases EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed. A variation of the search words “naloxone”, “opioid” and “overdose” were used in each database. The articles were screened according to the predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria and categorized based on their key perspective or target population. Results: The initial database search yielded a total of 1483 articles. After a series of screening processes, 51 articles were included for analysis. Two key stakeholder perspectives emerged: patients and bystanders (n = 36), and healthcare professionals (n = 15). Within the patient and bystander group, a strong consensus arose that there were positive outcomes from increased access to take-home naloxone and relevant training programs. Despite these positive outcomes, some healthcare professionals were concerned that take-home naloxone would encourage high-risk opioid use. Conclusion: Take-home naloxone is slowly being introduced into community practice, with a sense of enthusiasm from patients and bystanders. There are still a number of barriers that need to be addressed from healthcare professionals’ perspective. Future research should be aimed at emergency care professionals outside of the US, who are most experienced with naloxone and its potential impact on the community.

Naloxone provision to emergency department patients recognized as high-risk for opioid use disorder.

Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are at increased risk for overdose and death. Clinical practice guidelines and professional organization policy statements recommend providing naloxone to patients at risk for overdose. We sought to characterize fidelity to naloxone practice recommendations in a cohort of Emergency Department (ED) patients in whom opioid use disorder was suspected by the treating physician. This single-center cross-sectional study evaluated electronic health records from an urban academic ED with 73,000 annual encounters in a region with a high prevalence of OUD. Patients ≥18years old with encounters from January 1, 2018 to November 30, 2019 were included if discharged from the ED and either administered buprenorphine in the ED or referred to outpatient substance use treatment. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of included patients provided naloxone (take-home or prescription). We used random effects multivariable logistic regression (accounting for multiple patient encounters) to estimate the odds ratio (OR) for receiving naloxone. Of 1036 eligible patient encounters, 320 resulted in naloxone provision (30.9%, 95% CI: 28.1-33.8). Naloxone provision occurred for 33.6% (95% CI 30.5-36.7) of 900 patients referred to outpatient substance use treatment without ED buprenorphine administration, 10.6% (95% CI 5.0-19.2) of 85 patients administered buprenorphine and not referred to outpatient substance use treatment, and 17.6% (95% CI 8.4-30.9) of 51 patients administered buprenorphine and referred to outpatient treatment. After controlling for age, sex, race, and prior provision of naloxone, the administration of buprenorphine was associated with a 94% lower odds (aOR=0.06 [95% CI 0.011-0.33]) for naloxone provision compared to those only referred to outpatient treatment. A majority of ED patients who received an intervention targeted at OUD, in an ED where take-home naloxone is freely available, did not receive either take-home naloxone or a prescription for naloxone at discharge. Patients receiving buprenorphine were less likely to receive naloxone than patients only referred to outpatient treatment. These data suggest barriers other than recognition of potential OUD and naloxone availability impact provision of naloxone and argue for a treatment "bundle" as a conceptual model for care of ED patients with suspected OUD.

Implementation of Clinical Algorithms for Take-Home Naloxone and Buprenorphine/ Naloxone in Emergency Rooms: SuboxED Project Evaluation

Introduction: Emergency departments (EDs) are often the first point of care for people at risk of opioid-related overdose, an issue on the rise in Canada. Dispensing take-home naloxone (THN) and/or initiating opioid agonist treatment (OAT) in the ED can help prevent overdose. Methods: The SuboxED (CC-BY-NC-SA) project evaluated the implementation of a clinical algorithm for dispensing THN and prescribing buprenorphine/naloxone (B/n) in three EDs in the province of Québec. We performed a retrospective review of ED electronic medical records flagged as “at risk of opioid overdose (ROO).” This study included an implementation process from April 1, 2018 to April 30, 2019, and an evaluation of the project implementation for eligible patients from May 1 to December 31, 2019. We also administered satisfaction surveys to medical teams and patients. Results: A total of 877 (36.2%) patient records were included in the analysis. Of these, 62% had a confirmed diagnostic of opioid use disorder (OUD) and 70.8% met eligibility criteria for naloxone prescription. However, only 7.7 % were given a prescription or take-home naloxone in the ED, and 12.4 % were initiated on B/n in the ED or in the community after the ED visit. Seven patients and 125 health care providers from EDs, clinics, and retail pharmacies completed the survey. Conclusion: The SuboxED project demonstrated the feasibility of implementing a clinical algorithm for dispensing THN and initiating B/n in the ED, and of evaluating its efficacy in the 6 months following implantation. In addition to advocating for free access to THN in EDs, scaling up the uptake of the algorithm in EDs is the next challenge.

Opioid Prescribing with Take-Home Naloxone: Rationale and Recommendations

Although take-home naloxone is available for prescribing, recommended for certain high-risk patients, and can prevent overdose-related deaths, access to naloxone remains a challenge. This review describes the high-risk population on opioids that benefit from naloxone co-prescription, guidelines, and the current trends in naloxone prescribing, and the barriers faced by all the stakeholders. Opioid-related overdoses and deaths still occur at critically high numbers. Short-acting opioid antagonists like naloxone can reverse the effect of an overdose in a few minutes. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved naloxone nasal spray, and auto-injectable kits are both effective and easy to administer. An increasing number of states in the USA mandate the co-prescription of naloxone for patients on chronic opioid therapy, irrespective of the presence of other underlying risk factors. The lack of provider education is one of the significant barriers for co-prescribing naloxone with opioids. Naloxone can be lifesaving in patients experiencing an opioid overdose. Providers are encouraged to co-prescribe take-home naloxone for high-risk patients on chronic opioid therapy. Understanding the barriers, creating awareness, and providing education can increase the prescription of take-home naloxone and help prevent opioid overdose-related deaths.

Accessing Take-Home Naloxone in British Columbia and the role of community pharmacies: Results from the analysis of administrative data.

IntroductionBritish Columbia’s (BC) Take-Home Naloxone (THN) program provides naloxone to bystanders for use in cases of suspected opioid overdose. This study seeks to provide trends and analysis from the provincial BC THN program since inception in 2012 to the end of 2018.Materials and methodsBC THN shipment and distribution records from 2012–2018 were retrieved. Frequency distributions were used to describe characteristics of individuals accessing the program. To evaluate correlates of distribution after the addition of hundreds of pharmacy distribution sites, an analytic sample was limited to records from 2018, and multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate correlates of collecting naloxone at a pharmacy site.ResultsSince program inception to the end of 2018, there were 398,167 naloxone kits shipped to distribution sites, 149,999 kits reported distributed, and 40,903 kits reported used to reverse an overdose in BC. There was a significant increasing trend in the number of naloxone kits used to reverse an overdose over time (p<0.01), and more than 90% of kits that were reported used were distributed to persons at risk of an overdose. Individuals not personally at risk of overdose had higher odds of collecting naloxone at a pharmacy site, compared to other community sites (including harm reduction supply distribution sites, peer led organizations, drop-in centers, and supportive housing sites) (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 2.69; 95% CI: 2.50–2.90).ConclusionsThis study documents thousands of opioid overdose reversals facilitated through the BC THN program. While those at highest risk of overdose may preferentially access naloxone through community sites, naloxone distribution through pharmacies has allowed the BC THN program to expand dramatically, increasing naloxone availability through longer opening hours on evenings and weekends. and in rural and remote regions. A diversity of naloxone distribution sites and strategies is crucial to prevent rising opioid overdose deaths.

Emergency Nurse Perceptions of Naloxone Distribution in the Emergency Department

IntroductionEmergency department encounters are an opportunity to distribute naloxone kits to patients at risk of opioid overdose. Several programs cite mixed uptake and implementation barriers including staff education and burden. Emergency nurses can facilitate many approaches to naloxone distribution (eg, prescription, overdose education, dispensing take-home naloxone). To evaluate acceptance, we investigated nurse perceptions about take-home naloxone, describing potential barriers to program implementation. MethodsThis qualitative study enrolled 17 emergency nurses from an urban trauma center emergency department and affiliated community emergency department. During the study period, nurses in both sites could distribute take-home naloxone kits stocked in the medication dispensing system. We conducted 12 individual, in-depth interviews and 3 distinct focus groups involving 12 nurses in aggregate. A semistructured interview guide was used with a range of topics surrounding pain management, addiction, opioid overdose, and emergency care. We employed conventional content analysis to enable thematic analysis of transcripts. ResultsSix component themes emerged as part of the overarching theme "mixed feelings about naloxone—morally distressing." One positive theme identified naloxone as an opportunity for discussion. Negative themes included (1) Addiction is a choice, why can’t we help other diseases? It’s unfair; (2) Providing naloxone enables and condones the behavior; (3) Emergency departments cannot treat social issues; (4) Patients can’t give it to themselves; it’s wasting money; and (5) Moral distress. DiscussionPerceptions and moral distress may be a barrier to ED-based take-home naloxone programs. Development of interventions targeting naloxone misperceptions and addiction stigma should be a goal of expanded implementation efforts.

Feasibility and acceptability of take-home naloxone for people released from prison in New South Wales, Australia.

To assess the feasibility and acceptability of a take-home naloxone program for people with a history of opioid use released from prison in New South Wales, Australia. Cross-sectional interviews with people with a history of opioid use who were recently released from prison (n = 105), and semi-structured interviews with key clinical and operational staff of Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network and Corrective Services NSW (n = 9). Among people with a history of opioid use who had recently left prison, there was very high awareness of the elevated risk of overdose following release from prison (95%) and the potential for naloxone to reverse an opioid overdose (97%). Participants considered that their personal risk of overdose was low, despite ongoing opioid use being common. Participants were largely supportive of take-home naloxone, but the majority (83%) stated that proactively obtaining naloxone would be a low priority for them following release. Key informants were supportive of introducing naloxone training and supply and identified barriers to implementation, including adequate resourcing, identifying the population for training, and developing an appropriate model of training and implementation. There was widespread support for naloxone training in custody and distribution at release among people recently released from prison and key stakeholders in health-care provision and prisons administration. As proactively accessing naloxone is a low priority for patients, naloxone supply at release may be more effective than programs that refer releasees to local pharmacies, but developing a sustainable supply model requires consideration of several barriers.

Factors associated with withdrawal symptoms and anger among people resuscitated from an opioid overdose by take-home naloxone: Exploratory mixed methods analysis

IntroductionTake-home naloxone (THN) is a clinically effective and cost-effective means of reducing opioid overdose fatality. Nonetheless, naloxone administration that successfully saves a person's life can still produce undesirable and harmful effects. AimTo better understand factors associated with two widely reported adverse outcomes following naloxone administration; namely the person resuscitated displays: i. withdrawal symptoms and ii. anger. MethodsA mixed methods study combining a randomized controlled trial of overdose education and naloxone prescribing to people with opioid use disorder and semi-structured qualitative interviews with trial participants who had responded to an overdose whilst in the trial. All data were collected in New York City (2014–2019). A dataset (comprising demographic, pharmacological, situational, interpersonal, and overdose training related variables) was generated by transforming qualitative interview data from 47 overdose events into dichotomous variables and then combining these with quantitative demographic and overdose training related data from the main trial. Associations between variables within the dataset and reports of: i. withdrawal symptoms and ii. anger were explored using chi-squared tests, t-tests, and logistic regressions. ResultsA multivariate logistic regression found that people who had overdosed were significantly more likely to display anger if the person resuscitating them criticized, berated or chastised them during resuscitation (adjusted OR = 27 [95% CI = 4.0–295]). In contrast, they were significantly less likely to display anger if the person resuscitating them communicated positively with them (OR = 0.10 [95% CI = 0.01–0.78]). Both positive and negative communication styles were independently associated with anger, and communication was associated with 59% of the variance in anger. There was no evidence that people who displayed withdrawal symptoms were more likely to display anger than those not displaying withdrawal symptoms, and neither displaying withdrawal symptoms nor displaying anger were associated with using more drugs after resuscitation. ConclusionsContrary to common assumptions, withdrawal symptoms and anger following naloxone administration may be unrelated phenomena. Findings are consistent with previous research that has suggested that a lay responder's positive or reassuring communication style may lessen anger post overdose. Implications for improving THN programmes and naloxone administration are discussed.

Access and Barriers to Take-Home Naloxone Use among Emergency Department Patients with Opioid Misuse in Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Background The opioid epidemic has prompted the expansion of take-home naloxone (THN) distribution programs. The proportion of emergency department (ED) patients with opioid misuse who have access to a naloxone kit (NK) and barriers to using it are unclear. Objective: Characterizing the access and barrier to NK use among at-risk ED patients. Methods: We enrolled a convenience sample of ED patients with active opioid misuse from May 21–July 31, 2018. We administered a survey to collect patients’ demographic data, substance use history, and access to and use of NK. The primary outcome was NK access (prior receipt of a kit or prescription); secondary outcomes were knowledge and use of NK, and barriers to obtaining and using it. Results: Of 165 respondents, 71.5% knew of THN programs and 57.6% (n = 95) had access to THN by either having received a NK (n = 90) or a prescription (n = 5); 34 respondents received both. Among 39 (23.6%) who received a naloxone prescription, 25 (64.1%) filled it. 60.0% (n = 99) reported knowing how to administer naloxone; lack of training was the primary reason (n = 63/66, 96.9%) for their unfamiliarity. Patients who presented after an opioid overdose (25.5%; n = 42) were less likely to have knowledge of THN programs (57.1% vs. 76.4%), and to have received a NK (35.7% vs. 61.0%). Conclusion: Awareness of THN programs was high among our cohort. But approximately 60% the respondents received a NK or knew how to use it. Despite efforts to expand THN access, gaps in knowledge, access, and use exist.

Development of a take-home naloxone program at an urban academic emergency department

ObjectiveTo describe the development of an ED-based take-home naloxone (THN) program in which naloxone kits are dispensed directly to patients during ED discharge. Practice descriptionOur THN program was carried out at an urban academic hospital in downtown Chicago, IL. The THN kits consisted of 3 vials of 0.4-mg naloxone and 3 sterile syringes and needles for intramuscular delivery. Any member of the ED team (e.g., physician, pharmacist, or nurse) could recommend naloxone dispensing for a patient; however only the treating ED physician served as the prescriber for record. The ED pharmacist provided bedside education on recognizing opioid overdose and administering naloxone. The naloxone kit was dispensed to the patient at no cost. Practice innovationThis ED pharmacist-led naloxone dispensing model bypasses barriers to naloxone filling and ensures that patients walk out of the emergency department with naloxone in hand. Evaluation methodsWe report key metrics from the first 16 months of program implementation, including the number of ED visits for opioid overdose and THN kits dispensed. We further describe the key facilitators and barriers to program development. ResultsOver 16 months, our emergency department had 669 unique visits for opioid overdose, and we dispensed 168 THN kits (10.5 per month). We are aware of at least 3 cases in which our THN kits were used to reverse opioid overdose. We faced key informational barriers to program development, such as a lack of knowledge regarding the allowability of ED medication dispensing, as well as financial barriers, such as the need to obtain a supply of naloxone. We also recognized the key facilitators of success, such as early engagement with hospital leadership. ConclusionImplementing a successful THN program is possible in the ED setting, and individual hospital emergency departments seeking to build their own program may benefit from our report.

Protocol for Take-home naloxone In Multicentre Emergency (TIME) settings: feasibility study

BackgroundOpioids, such as heroin, kill more people worldwide by overdose than any other type of drug, and death rates associated with opioid poisoning in the UK are at record levels (World Drug Report 2018 [Internet]. [cited 2019 Nov 19]. Available from: http://www.unodc.org/wdr2018/; Deaths related to drug poisoning in England and Wales - Office for National Statistics [Internet]. [cited 2019 Nov 19]. Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsrelatedtodrugpoisoninginenglandandwales/2018registrations). Naloxone is an opioid antagonist which can be distributed in ‘kits’ for administration by witnesses in an overdose emergency. This intervention is known as take-home naloxone (THN). We know that THN can save lives on an individual level, but there is currently limited evidence about the effectiveness of THN distribution on an aggregate level, in specialist drug service settings or in emergency service settings. Notably, we do not know whether THN kits reduce deaths from opioid overdose in at-risk populations, if there are unforeseen harms associated with THN distribution or if THN is cost-effective. In order to address this research gap, we aim to determine the feasibility of a fully powered cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) of THN distribution in emergency settings.MethodsWe will carry out a feasibility study for a RCT of THN distributed in emergency settings at four sites, clustered by Emergency Department (ED) and catchment area within its associated ambulance service. THN is a peer-administered intervention. At two intervention sites, emergency ambulance paramedics and ED clinical staff will distribute THN to adult patients who are at risk of opioid overdose. At two control sites, practice will carry on as usual. We will develop a method of identifying a population to include in an evaluation, comprising people at risk of fatal opioid overdose, who may potentially receive naloxone included in a THN kit.We will gather anonymised outcomes up to 1 year following a 12-month ‘live’ trial period for patients at risk of death from opioid poisoning. We expect approximately 100 patients at risk of opioid overdose to be in contact with each service during the 1-year recruitment period. Our outcomes will include deaths, emergency admissions, intensive care admissions, and ED attendances. We will collect numbers of eligible patients attended by participating in emergency ambulance paramedics and attending ED, THN kits issued, and NHS resource usage. We will determine whether to progress to a fully powered trial based on pre-specified progression criteria: sign-up of sites (n = 4), staff trained (≥ 50%), eligible participants identified (≥ 50%), THN provided to eligible participants (≥ 50%), people at risk of death from opioid overdose identified for inclusion in follow-up (≥ 75% of overdose deaths), outcomes retrieved for high-risk individuals (≥ 75%), and adverse event rate (< 10% difference between study arms).DiscussionThis feasibility study is the first randomised, methodologically robust investigation of THN distribution in emergency settings. The study addresses an evidence gap related to the effectiveness of THN distribution in emergency settings. As this study is being carried out in emergency settings, obtaining informed consent on behalf of participants is not feasible. We therefore employ novel methods for identifying participants and capturing follow-up data, with effectiveness dependent on the quality of the available routine data.Trial registrationISRCTN13232859 (Registered 16/02/2018)

"Generally, you get 86'ed because you're a liability": An application of Integrated Threat Theory to frequently witnessed overdoses and social distancing responses.

While rates of opioid overdose deaths in North American have increased exponentially in recent years, most overdoses are not fatal, especially when witnesses are present and can intervene. Previous research has found that some people who use drugs [PWUDs] trained in overdose response might cut social ties with frequent overdosers, leading to more solitary opioid use and risk of death if someone overdoses alone. To examine the phenomenon of social distancing of people who overdose frequently, we used data from fifty-two in-depth qualitative interviews collected in Southern California with PWUDs who had recently witnessed an opioid overdose. Transcripts were reviewed and coded thematically, using the Integrated Threat Theory (ITT) to conceptualize the observed phenomenon. ITT outlines how realistic and symbolic threats are experienced by a group. We found that while some participants acknowledged the role of adulterated street drugs in overdoses, individualized blame was nonetheless imposed. Accusations of careless drug use practices fostered negative stereotyping towards frequent overdosers. This was attributed to the need to summon 911 for rescue, which often resulted in police dispatch. The intergroup relationship between police and PWUDs is precarious as police pose realistic threats onto PWUDs - such as incarceration, eviction, and manslaughter charges - leading to intragroup anxiety among PWUDs about future overdose events, and labelled frequent overdosers as liabilities. These threats, and inter/intra-group conflict, explained one reason how and why non-fatal overdoses led to social distancing events. People who overdose frequently were also accused of breaking the norm of drug user surreptitiousness; a symbolic threat that endangered the group due to police exposure. Social distancing might dampen exposure to the protective effect of peer-led interventions such as take-home naloxone programs, increasing risk of overdose death. This phenomenon highlights how intergroup dynamics are driving intragroup processes. Suggestions for tailoring public health interventions are discussed.