More than just availability: Who has access and who administers take-home naloxone in Baltimore, MD


Autoři: Lauren Dayton aff001;  Rachel E. Gicquelais aff002;  Karin Tobin aff001;  Melissa Davey-Rothwell aff001;  Oluwaseun Falade-Nwulia aff003;  Xiangrong Kong aff004;  Michael Fingerhood aff005;  Abenaa A. Jones aff001;  Carl Latkin aff001
Působiště autorů: Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America aff001;  Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America aff002;  Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America aff003;  Department of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America aff004;  Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America aff005;  Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America aff006
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(11)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224686

Souhrn

Background

Fatal opioid overdose is a pressing public health concern in the United States. Addressing barriers and augmenting facilitators to take-home naloxone (THN) access and administration could expand program reach in preventing fatal overdoses.

Methods

THN access (i.e., being prescribed or receiving THN) was assessed in a Baltimore, Maryland-based sample of 577 people who use opioids (PWUO) and had a history of injecting drugs. A sub-analysis examined correlates of THN administration among those with THN access and who witnessed an overdose (N = 345). Logistic generalized estimating equations with robust standard errors were used to identify facilitators and barriers to accessing and using THN.

Results

The majority of PWUO (66%) reported THN access. In the multivariable model, decreased THN access was associated with the fear that a person may become aggressive after being revived with THN (aOR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.35–0.85), police threaten people at an overdose event (aOR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.36–1.00), and insufficient overdose training (aOR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.28–0.68). Enrollment in medication-assisted treatment, personally experiencing an overdose, and graduating from high school were associated with higher access. About half (49%) of PWUO with THN access and who had witnessed an overdose reported having administered THN. THN use was positively associated with “often” or “always” carrying THN (aOR: 3.47, 95% CI: 1.99–6.06), witnessing more overdoses (aOR:5.18, 95% CI: 2.22–12.07), experiencing recent homelessness, and injecting in the past year. THN use was reduced among participants who did not feel that they had sufficient overdose training (aOR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.32–0.96).

Conclusion

THN programs must bolster confidence in administering THN and address barriers to use, such as fear of a THN recipient becoming aggressive. Normative change around carrying THN is an important component in an overdose prevention strategy.

Klíčová slova:

Computer software – Drug administration – Drug therapy – Health insurance – Heroin – Opioids – Police – Schools


Zdroje

1. Scholl S, Seth P, Kariisa M, Wilson N, Baldwin G. Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Deaths—United States, 2013–2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;67:1419–1427.

2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Underlying Cause of Death 1999–2017 on CDC WONDER Online Database, released December, 2018. 2018.

3. National Safety Council. NSC Motor Vehicle Fatality Estimates [Internet]. 2017. Available from: https://www.nsc.org/Portals/0/Documents/NewsDocuments/2018/December_2017.pdf

4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2018 Annual Surveillance Report of Drug-Related Risks and Outcomes—United States. Surveill Spec Rep [Internet]. 2018; Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/pdf/pubs/2018-cdc-drug-surveillance-report.pdf

5. Armenian P, Vo KT, Barr-Walker J, Lynch KL. Fentanyl, fentanyl analogs and novel synthetic opioids: A comprehensive review. Neuropharmacology. 2018;134:121–32. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2017.10.016 29042317

6. Robinson A, Wermeling DP. Intranasal naloxone administration for treatment of opioid overdose. Am J Heal Pharm. 2014;71(24):2129–35.

7. World Health Organization. Substance use: Community management of opioid overdose. 2014.

8. Latkin CA, Edwards C, Davey-Rothwell MA, Yang C, Tobin KE. The relationship between drug use settings, roles in the drug economy, and witnessing a drug overdose in Baltimore, Maryland. Subst Abus. 2018;39(3):384–9. doi: 10.1080/08897077.2018.1439801 29432084

9. Martins SS, Sampson L, Cerdá M, Galea S. Worldwide prevalence and trends in unintentional drug overdose: A systematic review of the literature. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(11):e29–49. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.302843 26451760

10. Strang J, Best D, Man L-H, Noble A, Gossop M. Peer-initiated overdose resuscitation: fellow drug users could be mobilised to implement resuscitation. Int J Drug Policy. 2000;11(6):437–45. 11099924

11. Ogeil RP, Dwyer J, Bugeja L, Heilbronn C, Lubman DI, Lloyd B. Pharmaceutical opioid overdose deaths and the presence of witnesses. Int J Drug Policy. 2018;55:8–13. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.12.020 29433040

12. Davis CS, Walley AY, Bridger CM, Carolina N. Lessons Learned from the Expansion of Naloxone Access in Massachusetts and North Carolina. J Law, Med Ethics. 2015;43(Suppl 1):19–23.

13. Walley A, Xuan Z, Hackman HH, Quinn E, Doe-Simkins M, Sorensen-Alawad A, et al. Opioid overdose rates and implementation of overdose education and nasal naloxone distribution in Massachusetts: Interrupted time series analysis. BMJ. 2013;346(7894):1–13.

14. McDonald R, Strang J. Are take-home naloxone programmes effective? Systematic review utilizing application of the Bradford Hill criteria. Addiction. 2016;111(7):1177–87. doi: 10.1111/add.13326 27028542

15. Baltimore City Health Department. Baltimore city health commissioner signs new standing order for opioid overdose reversal medication [Internet]. 2017. Available from: https://health.baltimorecity.gov/news/press-releases/2017-06-01-baltimore-city-health-commissioner-signs-new-standing-order-opioid

16. Tobin KE, Davey MA, Latkin CA. Calling emergency medical services during drug overdose: An examination of individual, social and setting correlates. Addiction. 2005;100(3):397–404. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.00975.x 15733253

17. Heavey S, Chang Y-P, Vest B, Collins L, Wieczorek W, Homish G. ‘I have it just in case’—Naloxone access and changes in opioid use behaviours. Int J Drug Policy. 2018;51:27–35. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.09.015 29156400

18. Kenney SR, Anderson BJ, Bailey GL, Stein MD. Factors associated with naloxone administration in an opioid dependent sample. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2018;84:17–20. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2017.10.008 29195589

19. Khatiwoda P, Proeschold-Bell RJ, Park LP, Meade CS, Proescholdbell S. Facilitators and Barriers to Naloxone Kit Use Among Opioid-Dependent Patients Enrolled in Medication Assisted Therapy Clinics in North Carolina. N C Med J. 2018;79(3):149–55. doi: 10.18043/ncm.79.3.149 29735615

20. Buajordet I, Næss AC, Jacobsen D, Brørs O. Adverse events after naloxone treatment of episodes of suspected acute opioid overdose. Eur J Emerg Med. 2004;11(1):19–23. 15167188

21. Clarke SFJ, Dargan PI, Jones AL. Naloxone in opioid poisoning: Walking the tightrope. Emerg Med J. 2005;22(9):612–6. doi: 10.1136/emj.2003.009613 16113176

22. Gladdis G, Watson W. Naloxone-associated patient violence:An overlooked toxicity? Ann Pharmacother. 1992;26:196–8. doi: 10.1177/106002809202600211 1554930

23. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2014.

24. Drug Enforcement Administration: Strategic Intelligence Section. Fentanyl Remains the Most Significant Synthetic Opioid Threat and Poses the Greatest Threat to the Opioid User Market in the United States [Internet]. 2018. Available from: https://ndews.umd.edu/sites/ndews.umd.edu/files/fentanyl-remains-most-significant-synthetic-opioid-threat-2018.pdf

25. Latkin CA, Dayton L, Davey-Rothwell MA, Tobin KE. Fentanyl and Drug Overdose: Perceptions of Fentanyl Risk, Overdose Risk Behaviors, and Opportunities for Intervention among People who use Opioids in Baltimore, USA. Subst Use Misuse. 2019;0(0):1–9.

26. Kantak KM, Miczek KA. Aggression during morphine withdrawal: Effects of method of withdrawal, fighting experience, and social role. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1986;90(4):451–6.

27. Ko S, Ford J, Kassam-Adams N, Berkowitz S, Wilson C, Wong M, et al. Creating trauma-informed systems: Child welfare, education, first responders, health care, juvenile justice. Prof Psychol Res Pract. 2008;39(4):396–404.

28. Muskett C. Trauma-informed care in inpatient mental health settings: A review of the literature. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2014;23:51–9. doi: 10.1111/inm.12012 23363398

29. Kelly K, Kerr D, Dietze P, Patrick I, Walker T, Koutsogiannis Z. Randomised trial of intranasal versus intramuscular naloxone in prehospital treatment for suspected opioid overdose. Med J Aust. 2005;182(1):24–7. 15651944

30. Neale J, Strang J. Naloxone-does over-antagonism matter? Evidence of iatrogenic harm after emergency treatment of heroin/opioid overdose. Addiction. 2015;110(10):1644–52. doi: 10.1111/add.13027 26119038

31. Rook E, Van Ree J, Van Den Brink W, Hillebrand M, Huitema A, Hendriks V, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of high doses of pharmaceutically prepared heroin, by intravenous or by inhalation route in opioid-dependent patients. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2006;98(1):86–96. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-7843.2006.pto_233.x 16433897

32. Dunn K, Yepez-Laubach C, Nuzzo P, Fingerhood M, Kelly A, Berman S, et al. Randomized controlled trial of a computerized opioid overdose education intervention. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;173:S39–47. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.12.003 28363318

33. Roxburgh A, Hall W, Dobbins T, Gisev N, Burns L, Pearson S, et al. Trends in heroin and pharmaceutical opioid overdose deaths in Australia. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;179:291–8. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.07.018 28826104

34. Gomes T, Tadrous M, Mamdani MM, Juurlink DN, Paterson JM. The Burden of Opioid-Related Mortality in the United States. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(2):e180217. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.0217 30646062

35. Fischer B, Vojtila L, Rehm J. The ‘fentanyl epidemic’ in Canada–Some cautionary observations focusing on opioid-related mortality. Prev Med (Baltim). 2018;107:109–13.


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2019 Číslo 11