Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Homelessness and substance use often coexist, resulting in high morbidity. Emergency department (ED) patients have disproportionate rates of both homelessness and substance use, yet little research has examined the overlap of these issues in the ED setting. We aimed to characterize alcohol and drug use in a sample of homeless vs. non-homeless ED patients. METHODS:A random sample of urban hospital ED patients were invited to complete an interview regarding housing, substance use, and other health and social factors. We compared substance use characteristics among patients who did vs. did not report current literal (streets/shelter) homelessness. Additional analyses were performed using a broader definition of homelessness in the past 12-months. RESULTS:Patients who were currently homeless (n = 316, 13.7%) versus non-homeless (n = 1,993, 86.3%) had higher rates of past year unhealthy alcohol use (44.4% vs. 30.5%, p < .0001), any drug use (40.8% vs. 18.8%, p < .0001), heroin use (16.7% vs. 3.8%, p < .0001), prescription opioid use (12.5% vs. 4.4%, p < .0001), and lifetime opioid overdose (15.8% vs. 3.7%, p < .0001). In multivariable analyses, current homelessness remained significantly associated with unhealthy alcohol use, AUDIT scores among unhealthy alcohol users, any drug use, heroin use, and opioid overdose; past 12-month homelessness was additionally associated with DAST-10 scores among drug users and prescription opioid use. CONCLUSIONS:Patients experiencing homelessness have higher rates and greater severity of alcohol and drug use than other ED patients across a range of measures. These findings have implications for planning services for patients with concurrent substance use and housing problems.

Background: Substance use (SU) is common among ED patients, with 1 in 10 ED users having an alcohol or drug use disorder. ED patients also have high levels of social needs such as homelessness and food insecurity. Yet, little research has examined how such social determinants of health (SDOH) intersect with SU among ED patients. In this study, we compared the prevalence of several SDOH among ED patients who did and did not screen positive for unhealthy alcohol and drug use. Methods: We surveyed a random sample of ED patients at a NYC public hospital from Nov 2016-Sept 2017. Eligible patients were >=18 years old, medically/psychiatrically stable, not in prison/police custody, and spoke English or Spanish. RA shifts occurred during all days of the week and hours of the day. RAs administered a 20-40 minute survey with validated single-item screeners for unhealthy alcohol and drug use and questions on self-reported past year social needs from national surveys or prior studies. We compared prevalence of SDOH by SU screening status in bivariate analyses with chisquare tests. Results: About half of patients (52.0%) approached were ineligible, primarily because they were medically unfit, intoxicated, or in prison/police custody. 2,396 of 2,925 eligible patients participated (81.9%); 76 duplicate patient records were removed, leaving a final sample size of 2,321 patients. Nearly one-third (32.3%) screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use and 21.8% for any drug use. Regarding SDOH, rates among patients overall vs. those with unhealthy alcohol use vs. those with drug use were: 1) homelessness 13.8%, 18.7% (X2 p<0.01 for difference between those who did vs. did not screen positive), 25.8% (p<0.01); 2) housing instability 25.2%, 29.5% (p<0.01), 35.9% (p<0.01); 3) food insecurity 50.9%, 56.3% (p<0.01), 63.4% (p<0.01); 4) inability to meet essential expenses 40.8%, 45.9% (p<0.01), 52.7% (p<0.01); and 5) unemployment 43.3%, 45.1% (p=0.23), 55.1% (p<0.01). Conclusion: Rates of homelessness and other social needs were high among ED patients in this study, suggesting the importance of considering SDOH in emergency medicine practice. We add to prior literature by showing that these needs were even higher among patients who screened positive for SU. These findings are important, as patients' significant comorbid social needs may affect the success of ED-based efforts to address substance use

Study Objectives: Despite the high prevalence of unhealthy alcohol use among emergency department (ED) patients, screening and intervention is rarely integrated into care. Streamlining assessment procedures could boost adoption as time and competing priorities are commonly cited barriers. A single-item screening question (SISQ) has been validated (Saitz et al., 2009, 2010); however, further assessment is then needed for risk stratification to inform the intervention. The 10-item Alcohol Use Identification Test (AUDIT) is often used but may not be practical for the ED. We hypothesized that use of categorical, instead of dichotomous, response options for the SISQ would provide information on drinking severity and eliminate the need for further assessment to guide intervention. Methods: Using a non-targeted, systematic approach, we screened and assessed a purposive sample of English-or Spanish-speaking adults from an urban, public ED between the hours of 8am to 12am on each day of the week. We asked each participant the SISQ, "How many times in the past 12 months have you had [X] or more alcoholic drinks in a day?" (where X is 5 for men and 4 for women). Patients with positive responses (ie, any heavy use) were asked to select the closest frequency of use among the following categories: "less than monthly," "monthly," "weekly," or "daily or almost daily," followed by AUDIT. We tested our a priori hypothesis that heavy drinking frequency dichotomized to [less than or equal to monthly] vs. [weekly or more] could discriminate between patients with AUDIT scores of 0-15 (zones 1-2) and 16-40 (zones 3-4), to determine who should receive brief advice vs. brief intervention. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC), and performed k-fold cross-validation using k=5 folds. Results: 1310 of 4281 patients (30.6%) screened positive for unhealthy drinking. Among those, 72.3% had an AUDIT score < 15; 27.7% had a score >15. Figure 1 shows the positive relationship between AUDIT score and heavy drinking frequency. Using a frequency of weekly or more to identify patients with an AUDIT score of > 15 had a sensitivity of 89.3%, specificity of 74.0%, positive likelihood ratio of 3.43, negative likelihood ratio of 0.14, AUROC of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88-0.92), and cross-validation AUROC of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.82-0.87). These relationships held across age, sex, and race/ethnicity. When AUDIT scores of < 15 were imputed for patients who screened negative on the SISQ, the AUROC and cross-validation AUROC rose to 0.98 (95% CI: 0.97-0.98) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96-0.97). Conclusions: In this sample of ED patients, the categorized frequency of heavy drinking reported in the single-item screening question was excellent at discriminating AUDIT scores at a cut-off of 15, and thus at determining intervention needs. [Figure Presented]

Hurricane Sandy struck New York City on October 29, 2012, causing not only a large amount of physical damage, but also straining people's health and disrupting health care services throughout the city. In prior research, we determined that emergency department (ED) visits from the most vulnerable hurricane evacuation flood zones in New York City increased after Hurricane Sandy for several medical diagnoses, but also for the diagnosis of homelessness. In the current study, we aimed to further explore this increase in ED visits for homelessness after Hurricane Sandy's landfall. We performed an observational before-and-after study using an all-payer claims database of ED visits in New York City to compare the demographic characteristics, insurance status, geographic distribution, and health conditions of ED patients with a primary or secondary ICD-9 diagnosis of homelessness or inadequate housing in the first week after Hurricane Sandy's landfall versus the baseline weekly average in 2012 prior to Hurricane Sandy. We found statistically significant increases in ED visits for diagnosis codes of homelessness or inadequate housing in the week after Hurricane Sandy's landfall. Those accessing the ED for homelessness or inadequate housing were more often elderly and insured by Medicare after versus before the hurricane. Secondary diagnoses among those with a primary ED diagnosis of homelessness or inadequate housing also differed after versus before Hurricane Sandy. These observed differences in the demographic, insurance, and co-existing diagnosis profiles of those with an ED diagnosis of homelessness or inadequate housing before and after Hurricane Sandy suggest that a new population cohort-potentially including those who had lost their homes as a result of storm damage-was accessing the ED for homelessness or other housing issues after the hurricane. Emergency departments may serve important public health and disaster response roles after a hurricane, particularly for people who are homeless or lack adequate housing. Further, tracking ED visits for homelessness may represent a novel surveillance mechanism to assess post-disaster infrastructure impact and to prepare for future disasters.

Background: ED-based SBIRT for alcohol and drug use has the potential to affect public health greatly. Time and resource constraints limit implementation. Objectives: We aimed to determine whether particular chief complaints could be used to identify patients likely to screen positive for unhealthy alcohol or drug use, thus reducing the proportion of patients needing to be screened and increasing the efficiency of SBIRT. Methods: Cross-sectional study using baseline data from NIDA CTN0047: SMART-ED, a multicenter, randomized 3-arm SBIRT trial which screened 14,972 ED patients. Free-text chief complaints were coded using a tested algorithm, then reviewed and further collapsed by multiple team members to ensure agreement. The 454 excluded patients had missing data, complaints related to alcohol or drug use, or complaints stated by <15 subjects. Positive screens were defined as AUDIT-C > 4 for men and >3 for women (alcohol) and DAST >3 (drugs) - to detect the spectrum of unhealthy alcohol or drug use (from at-risk to dependence). We rank-ordered the chief complaints by their (Figure presented) sensitivity and positive predictive value using two strategies: 1) to minimize the number of chief complaints and 2) to assess the fewest number of ED patients. Our goal was to identify 75% of ED patients having positive assessments using these strategies. Results: The screening assessments were positive in 5,805/14,561 (39.9%) for alcohol and 2,454/14,494 (16.9%) for drugs. We collapsed the free-text chief complaints into 50 usable categories. To identify 75% of all ED patients having positive assessments using the first strategy would require including 19 chief complaints for alcohol screening and 20 chief complaints for drug screening. Adapting the second strategy, we would need to screen at least 71% and 68% of all ED patients for alcohol and drugs respectively to identify 75% of those having positive assessments. (See Table 47 and Figure 47.) Conclusion: In this multi-ED study, unhealthy alcohol and drug use was exceptionally prevalent. Using chief complaints did not significantly improve the efficiency of SBIRT for AOD