Faculty Bibliography

In March of 2015, the United States Department of Health and Human Services identified 3 priority areas to reduce opioid use disorders and overdose, which are as follows: opioid-prescribing practices; expanded use and distribution of naloxone; and expansion of medication-assisted treatment. In this narrative review of overdose prevention and the role of prescribers and pharmacists in distributing naloxone, we address these priority areas and present a clinical scenario within the review involving a pharmacist, a patient with chronic pain and anxiety, and a primary care physician. We also discuss current laws related to naloxone prescribing and dispensing. This review was adapted from the Prescribe to Prevent online continuing medical education module created for prescribers and pharmacists (http://www.opioidprescribing.com/naloxone_module_1-landing).

Fatal opioid overdose, the leading cause of injury death in the USA, is regularly described as an epidemic. The response to the overdose crisis, however, has largely failed to utilise many of the public health tools that have proven effective in combating epidemics. Chief among these is the systematic and timely use of data by public health officials to track outbreaks and effectively target interventions. This failure is particularly acute regarding data from prescription monitoring programmes, which are routinely used by clinicians and law enforcement agents, but often unavailable to health officials. We argue for a shift in emphasis and resources towards an evidence-based public health approach to data use for overdose prevention. [Davis CS, Green TC, Zaller ND. Addressing the overdose epidemic requires timely access to data to guide interventions. Drug Alcohol Rev 2016;35:383-386].

BACKGROUND:The opioid overdose epidemic in the United States is driven in large part by inappropriate opioid prescribing. Although most American physicians receive little or no training during medical school regarding evidence-based prescribing, substance use disorders, and pain management, some states require continuing medical education (CME) on these topics. We report the results of a systematic legal analysis of such requirements, together with recommendations for improved physician training. METHODS:To determine the presence and characteristics of CME requirements in the United States, we systematically collected, reviewed, and coded all laws that require such education as a condition of obtaining or renewing a license to practice medicine. Laws or regulations that mandate one-time or ongoing training in topics designed to reduce overdose risk were further characterized using an iterative protocol RESULTS:Only five states require all or nearly all physicians to obtain CME on topics such as pain management and controlled substance prescribing, and fewer than half require any physicians to obtain such training. CONCLUSIONS:While not a replacement for improved education in medical school and post-graduate clinical training, evidence-based CME can help improve provider knowledge and practice. Requiring physicians to obtain CME that accurately presents evidence regarding opioid prescribing and related topics may help reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. States and the federal government should also strongly consider requiring such training in medical school and residency.

Recently, an extensive study of 2,748 polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from across their circumpolar range was published in PLOS ONE, which used microsatellites and mitochondrial haplotypes to apparently show altered population structure and a dramatic change in directional gene flow towards the Canadian Archipelago-an area believed to be a future refugium for polar bears as their southernmost habitats decline under climate change. Although this study represents a major international collaborative effort and promised to be a baseline for future genetics work, methodological shortcomings and errors of interpretation undermine some of the study's main conclusions. Here, we present a reanalysis of this data in which we address some of these issues, including: (1) highly unbalanced sample sizes and large amounts of systematically missing data; (2) incorrect calculation of FST and of significance levels; (3) misleading estimates of recent gene flow resulting from non-convergence of the program BayesAss. In contrast to the original findings, in our reanalysis we find six genetic clusters of polar bears worldwide: the Hudson Bay Complex, the Western and Eastern Canadian Arctic Archipelago, the Western and Eastern Polar Basin, and-importantly-we reconfirm the presence of a unique and possibly endangered cluster of bears in Norwegian Bay near Canada's expected last sea-ice refugium. Although polar bears' abundance, distribution, and population structure will certainly be negatively affected by ongoing-and increasingly rapid-loss of Arctic sea ice, these genetic data provide no evidence of strong directional gene flow in response to recent climate change.

BACKGROUND:In an effort to prevent opioid overdose mortality among Veterans, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities began implementing opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) in 2013 and a national program began in 2014. VA is the first national health care system to implement OEND. The goal of this study is to examine patient perceptions of OEND training and naloxone kits. METHODS:Four focus groups were conducted between December 2014 and February 2015 with 21 patients trained in OEND. Participants were recruited from a VA residential facility in California with a substance use disorder treatment program (mandatory OEND training) and a homeless program (optional OEND training). Data were analyzed using matrices and open and closed coding approaches to identify participants' perspectives on OEND training including benefits, concerns, differing opinions, and suggestions for improvement. RESULTS:Veterans thought OEND training was interesting, novel, and empowering, and that naloxone kits will save lives. Some veterans expressed concern about using syringes in the kits. A few patients who never used opioids were not interested in receiving kits. Veterans had differing opinions about legal and liability issues, whether naloxone kits might contribute to relapse, and whether and how to involve family in training. Some veterans expressed uncertainty about the effects of naloxone. Suggested improvements included active learning approaches, enhanced training materials, and increased advertisement. CONCLUSIONS:OEND training was generally well received among study participants, including those with no indication for a naloxone kit. Patients described a need for OEND and believed it could save lives. Patient feedback on OEND training benefits, concerns, opinions, and suggestions provides important insights to inform future OEND training programs both within VA and in other health care settings. Training is critical to maximizing the potential for OEND to save lives, and this study includes specific suggestions for improving the effectiveness and acceptability of training.

BACKGROUND:Opioid overdose, which has reached epidemic levels in the United States, is reversible by administration of the medication naloxone. Naloxone requires a prescription but is not a controlled substance and has no abuse potential. In the last half-decade, the majority of states have modified their laws to increase layperson access to the medication. METHODS:We utilized a structured legal research protocol to systematically identify and review all statutes and regulations related to layperson naloxone access in the United States that had been adopted as of September, 2015. Each law discovered via this process was reviewed and coded by two trained legal researchers. RESULTS:As of September, 2015, 43 states and the District of Columbia have passed laws intended to increase layperson naloxone access. We categorized these laws into three domains: (1) laws intended to increase naloxone prescribing and distribution, (2) laws intended to increase pharmacy naloxone access, and (3) laws intended to encourage overdose witnesses to summon emergency responders. These laws vary greatly across states in such characteristics as the types of individuals who can receive a prescription for naloxone, whether laypeople can dispense the medication, and immunity provided to those who prescribe, dispense and administer naloxone or report an overdose emergency. CONCLUSIONS:Most states have now passed laws intended to increase layperson access to naloxone. While these laws will likely reduce overdose morbidity and mortality, the cost of naloxone and its prescription status remain barriers to more widespread access.

Prescription monitoring programs (PMPs), state-level databases that collect patient-specific prescription information at the time medications are dispensed, have been suggested as tools to address the overdose epidemic. We reviewed all laws in the United States (n = 25) that articulated the purposes PMPs are intended to serve. Attributes related to reducing abuse, misuse, and diversion of prescription medications appeared most commonly. Only 5 purpose statements mentioned the promotion of public health as goals of the PMP, and only 3 listed improving health care. None listed overdose prevention as a goal of the PMP.

The leading cause of adult injury death in the U.S.A. is drug overdose, the majority of which involves prescription opioid medications. Outside of the U.S.A., deaths by drug overdose are also on the rise, and overdose is a leading cause of death for drug users. Reducing overdose risk while maintaining access to prescription opioids when medically indicated requires careful consideration of how opioids are prescribed and dispensed, how patients use them, how they interact with other medications, and how they are safely stored. Pharmacists, highly trained professionals expert at detecting and managing medication errors and drug-drug interactions, safe dispensing, and patient counseling, are an under-utilized asset in addressing overdose in the U.S. and globally. Pharmacies provide a high-yield setting where patient and caregiver customers can access naloxone-an opioid antagonist that reverses opioid overdose-and overdose prevention counseling. This case study briefly describes and provides two US state-specific examples of innovative policy models of pharmacy-based naloxone, implemented to reduce overdose events and improve opioid safety: Collaborative Pharmacy Practice Agreements and Pharmacy Standing Orders.

BACKGROUND:State prescription monitoring programs (PMPs) purport to address the prescription opioid epidemic, but have evidenced limited effect on reducing opioid-related mortality. METHODS:We systematically reviewed publicly available, PMP web-based materials from December, 2012 to October, 2013, to assess the degree to which overdose prevention was articulated in state PMP goals, mission statement, and accessible educational materials. The sites and available resources of 47 state PMPs with a web presence were reviewed by two independent coders for use of "overdose" and related terms. Website materials were further coded to capture five general thematic orientations: supply reduction-therapeutic, supply reduction-punitive, demand reduction, public health/research, and harm reduction oriented in content. RESULTS:Twenty-nine of 47 (62%) PMPs did not address overdose or related terms in available online materials; six (12.8%) contained overdose-oriented messaging; and two included specific overdose prevention tools for providers. There were a median of three thematic orientations represented on the 18 state PMP websites mentioning only the term overdose, compared with a median of 4.5 thematic domains on the six PMP websites with overdose-oriented content. CONCLUSIONS:A more comprehensive, public health orientation for PMPs that explicitly and publicly articulates their application and role in overdose prevention may increase PMP effectiveness and use.