scholarly journals Use of a primary care and pharmacy-based model for the delivery of injectable opioid agonist treatment for severe opioid use disorder: a case report

2020 ◽  
Vol 192 (5) ◽  
pp. E115-E117
Author(s):  
Tyler Wilson ◽  
Rupi Brar ◽  
Christy Sutherland ◽  
Seonaid Nolan
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Case Report ◽  
Opioid Use Disorder ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Opioid Agonist ◽  
Opioid Agonist Treatment

Multi-site intervention to improve emergency department care for patients who live with opioid use disorder: A quantitative evaluation

CJEM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 784-792 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick McLane ◽  
Ken Scott ◽  
Zainab Suleman ◽  
Karen Yee ◽  
Brian R. Holroyd ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Opioid Use Disorder ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Opioid Agonist ◽  
Emergency Department Care ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Opioid Agonist Treatment ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Disorder Treatment

ABSTRACTBackgroundOpioid use disorder is a major public health crisis, and evidence suggests ways of better serving patients who live with opioid use disorder in the emergency department (ED). A multi-disciplinary team developed a quality improvement project to implement this evidence.MethodsThe intervention was developed by an expert working group consisting of specialists and stakeholders. The group set goals of increasing prescribing of buprenorphine/naloxone and providing next day walk-in referrals to opioid use disorder treatment clinics. From May to September 2018, three Alberta ED sites and three opioid use disorder treatment clinics worked together to trial the intervention. We used administrative data to track the number of ED visits where patients were given buprenorphine/naloxone. Monthly ED prescribing rates before and after the intervention were considered and compared with eight nonintervention sites. We considered whether patients continued to fill opioid agonist treatment prescriptions at 30, 60, and 90 days after their index ED visit to measure continuity in treatment.ResultsThe intervention sites increased their prescribing of buprenorphine/naloxone during the intervention period and prescribed more buprenorphine/naloxone than the controls. Thirty-five of 47 patients (74.4%) discharged from the ED with buprenorphine/naloxone continued to fill opioid agonist treatment prescriptions 30 days and 60 days after their index ED visit. Thirty-four patients (72.3%) filled prescriptions at 90 days.ConclusionsEmergency clinicians can effectively initiate patients on buprenorphine/naloxone when supports for this standardized evidence-based care are in place within their practice setting and timely follow-up in community is available.

scholarly journals Opioid agonist treatment and fatal overdose risk in a state‐wide US population receiving opioid use disorder services

Addiction ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 115 (9) ◽  
pp. 1683-1694 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noa Krawczyk ◽  
Ramin Mojtabai ◽  
Elizabeth A. Stuart ◽  
Michael Fingerhood ◽  
Deborah Agus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Opioid Use Disorder ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Opioid Agonist ◽  
Opioid Agonist Treatment ◽  
Fatal Overdose

scholarly journals Take Home Injectable Opioids for Opioid Use Disorder During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic Is in Urgent Need: A Case Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugenia Oviedo-Joekes ◽  
Scott MacDonald ◽  
Charles Boissonneault ◽  
Kelli Harper
Keyword(s):  
Addiction Treatment ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Opioid Use Disorder ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Regulatory Structure ◽  
Opioid Agonist ◽  
Opioid Agonist Treatment ◽  
First Case ◽  
Opioid Medications

Abstract Background: In North America the opioid poisoning crisis currently faces the unprecedented challenges brought by the COVID-19 pandemic, further straining people and communities already facing structural and individual vulnerabilities. People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are facing unique challenges in response to COVID-19, such as not being able to adopt best practices (e.g., physical distancing) if they’re financially insecure or living in shelters (or homeless). They also have other medical conditions that make them more likely to be immunocompromised and at risk of developing COVID-19. In response to the COVID-19 public health emergency, national and provincial regulatory bodies introduced guidance and exemptions to mitigate the spread of the virus. Among them, clinical guidance for prescribers were issued to allow take home opioid medications for opioid agonist treatment (OAT). Take Home for injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is only considered within a restrictive regulatory structure, specific to the pandemic. Nevertheless, this risk mitigation guidance allowed carries, mostly daily dispensed, to a population that would not have access to it prior to the pandemic. In this case it is presented and discussed that if a carry was possible during the pandemic, then the carry could continue post COVID-19 to address a gap in our approach to individualize care for people with OUD receiving iOAT.Case Presentation: Here we present the first case of a patient in Canada with long-term OUD that received take home injectable diacetylmorphine to self-isolate in an approved site after being diagnosed with COVID-19 during a visit to the emergency room where he was diagnosed with cellulitis and admitted to receive antibiotics. Conclusion: In the present case we demonstrated that it is feasible to provide iOAT outside the community clinic with no apparent negative consequences. Improving upon and making permanent these recently introduced risk mitigating guidance during COVID-19, have the potential not just to protect during the pandemic, but also to address long-overdue barriers to access evidence-based care in addiction treatment.

Punitive discontinuation of opioid agonist therapy during incarceration

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 337-342
Author(s):  
Allison Marmel ◽  
Nikki Bozinoff
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Opioid Use Disorder ◽  
Considerable Proportion ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Agonist Therapy ◽  
Opioid Agonist ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Opioid Agonist Therapy ◽  
Increased Risk

Purpose The prevalence of substance use disorders among incarcerated individuals in Canada is substantially higher than in the general population. Many incarcerated individuals with opioid use disorder remain untreated due to inadequate access to opioid agonist therapy (OAT). A considerable proportion of overdose-related deaths in the province of Ontario are individuals who have recently been released from prison. The purpose of this paper is to highlight that discontinuation of OAT as a disciplinary measure remains an active concern within prisons in Canada and places individuals with opioid use disorder at increased risk of relapse and resultant overdose death. Design/methodology/approach This case report describes an incarcerated client with opioid use disorder who was initially stable on OAT, but was forcibly tapered off OAT as a disciplinary measure and subsequently relapsed to illicit opioid use while in custody. Findings This case calls attention to concerns regarding treatment of opioid use disorder during incarceration, as forcible detoxification from OAT as a disciplinary measure is a highly dangerous practice. The authors discuss concerns regarding diversion and ways in which prison-based OAT programs can be improved to increase their safety and acceptability among correctional staff. Ongoing advocacy is required on the part of health-care workers and policymakers to ensure that individuals are able to appropriately access this life-saving therapy while incarcerated. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first case report to describe forcible tapering of OAT as a disciplinary measure during incarceration. Despite existing evidence emphasizing the significant risk of overdose associated with detoxification from opioids, this case highlights the need for further research into the causes and prevalence of this practice.

scholarly journals Treatment of opioid use disorder in primary care

BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. n784
Author(s):  
Megan Buresh ◽  
Robert Stern ◽  
Darius Rastegar
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Opioid Use Disorder ◽  
Opioid Antagonist ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Opioid Agonist ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Primary Care Settings ◽  
Illicit Opioid Use

AbstractOpioid use disorder (OUD) is a common, treatable chronic disease that can be effectively managed in primary care settings. Untreated OUD is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality—notably, overdose, infectious complications of injecting drug use, and profoundly diminished quality of life. Withdrawal management and medication tapers are ineffective and are associated with increased rates of relapse and death. Pharmacotherapy is the evidence based mainstay of OUD treatment, and many studies support its integration into primary care settings. Evidence is strongest for the opioid agonists buprenorphine and methadone, which randomized controlled trials have shown to decrease illicit opioid use and mortality. Discontinuation of opioid agonist therapy is associated with increased rates of relapse and mortality. Less evidence is available for the opioid antagonist extended release naltrexone, with a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials showing decreased illicit opioid use but no effect on mortality. Treating OUD in primary care settings is cost effective, improves outcomes for both OUD and other medical comorbidities, and is highly acceptable to patients. Evidence on whether behavioral interventions improve outcomes for patients receiving pharmacotherapy is mixed, with guidelines promoting voluntary engagement in psychosocial supports, including counseling. Further work is needed to promote the integration of OUD treatment into primary care and to overcome regulatory barriers to integrating methadone into primary care treatment in the US.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document