Elsevier

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Volume 148, 1 March 2015, Pages 209-212
Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Short communication
Brief overdose education is sufficient for naloxone distribution to opioid users,☆☆

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.12.009Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Comfort with recognition of, response to, and administration of naloxone for an overdose significantly increased after brief education among first-time recipients.

  • 96% of participants could identify at least one acceptable action to assess and one acceptable action to care for an opioid overdose.

  • Facility with naloxone administration was high across all assessments and significantly increased for intranasal administration after education for first-time recipients.

  • First-time recipients (before and after education) and refillers demonstrated a high level of knowledge on the Brief Overdose Recognition and Response Assessment.

Abstract

Background

While drug users are frequently equipped with naloxone for lay opioid overdose reversal, the amount of education needed to ensure knowledge of indications and administration is unknown.

Methods

We administered four instruments, assessing comfort and knowledge around opioid overdose and naloxone administration, to opioid users receiving naloxone for the first time (N = 60) and upon returning for a refill (N = 54) at community distribution programs. Participants completed the instruments prior to receiving naloxone; first-time recipients repeated the instruments immediately after the standardized 5–10 min education.

Results

Comfort with recognition of, response to, and administration of naloxone for an overdose event significantly increased after brief education among first-time recipients (p < 0.05). Knowledge of appropriate responses to opioid overdose was high across all assessments; 96% of participants could identify at least one acceptable action to assess and one acceptable action to care for an opioid overdose. Facility with naloxone administration was high across all assessments and significantly increased for intranasal administration after education for first-time recipients (p < 0.001). First-time recipients (before and after education) and refillers demonstrated a high level of knowledge on the Brief Overdose Recognition and Response Assessment, correctly identifying a mean of 13.7 out of 16 overdose scenarios.

Conclusions

Opioid users seeking naloxone in San Francisco have a high level of baseline knowledge around recognizing and responding to opioid overdose and those returning for refills retain that knowledge. Brief education is sufficient to improve comfort and facility in recognizing and managing overdose.

Introduction

Distribution of naloxone to laypersons is increasingly employed in response to the national epidemic of opioid overdose mortality (Centers for Disease and Prevention, 2012). Naloxone is a short-acting, high affinity opioid antagonist that rapidly reverses the effects of opioids through injection or intranasal administration. Naloxone has no abuse potential and is remarkably safe, with essentially no effects in the absence of opioids (Sporer, 1999). Two decades of experience with naloxone distribution have demonstrated that it can be safely administered by laypersons and high-level observational data suggest that making this medication available to those at risk of experiencing or witnessing an opioid overdose results in community-level reductions in opioid overdose mortality (Walley et al., 2013, Kerr et al., 2009, Barton et al., 2005).

Early naloxone programs dispensed naloxone with brief, sometimes optional, education (Dettmer et al., 2001, Maxwell et al., 2006). As naloxone distribution programs emerged in more formal settings, such as university-based research studies, longer trainings were developed (Seal et al., 2005) and have become standard in selected locations. Some of the 27 states with additional legislative protections for naloxone distribution, such as Maryland, require lengthy trainings that may constitute significant barriers to accessing naloxone (Public Health Law Research, 2014). As the overdose epidemic has expanded to prescription opioid users, many programs, such as those in busy medical clinics, again provide only brief education with naloxone prescriptions, addressing key elements like when and how to utilize naloxone. Multiple studies have demonstrated improved recognition and response to opioid overdose and use of naloxone after educational sessions (Doe-Simkins et al., 2009, Green et al., 2008, Walley et al., 2013, Williams et al., 2014). Recent work has demonstrated similar efficacy of education lasting 13 to 18 min (Jones et al., 2014). In fact, a recent paper from the Massachusetts naloxone program found that untrained respondents who utilized naloxone obtained by others exhibited high levels of competence with the medication (Doe-Simkins et al., 2014). While there is general consensus on the elements of education necessary for naloxone distribution (review of risk factors for, recognition of, and management of overdose, including naloxone administration), there is dramatic variation in practice regarding the duration – from 5 min to 8 h – of that education (Clark et al., 2014).

In San Francisco, the Drug Overdose Prevention and Education Project (DOPE) has been distributing naloxone since 2003, primarily through low-threshold drug services such as syringe access programs, with education lasting 5 to 10 min. We sought to determine if this brief education was sufficient to educate the target population on overdose recognition and management, including naloxone administration.

Section snippets

Setting

Study activities took place from February to July 2014 at four DOPE naloxone distribution sites at syringe access programs in San Francisco. The sites were selected for inclusion based on their longstanding relationship with DOPE and a high volume of opioid-using participants. This study was funded by Open Society Foundations and study procedures were approved by the University of California San Francisco Committee on Human Research, study ID 13-12060.

Participants

Syringe access program staff asked clients

Participant characteristics

Sixty first-time recipients and 54 refill recipients were included in the analysis (six refill recipients were excluded because they had previously participated in the study as first-time recipients). Participants in both the education and refill groups were predominantly male, homeless/unstably housed, with a mean age of 45 and 42 for the first-time and refill groups, respectively. Heroin was the most frequently reported drug of choice among both groups. Over 45% of total participants had a

Discussion

We found that opioid users seeking both initial and refill naloxone kits have high baseline levels of knowledge of opioid overdose, including comfort with responding to overdose, knowledge of overdose symptoms and indications for naloxone, knowledge of appropriate actions to take in response to overdose, and ability to assemble and utilize intranasal or injectable naloxone. Brief education improved the level of comfort with using naloxone, ability to properly administer intranasal naloxone, and

Conclusions

We found that opioid users seeking naloxone in San Francisco have high baseline knowledge of opioid overdose and naloxone administration and those returning for refills retain that knowledge. Brief education improves comfort, overdose recognition, and proper administration of intranasal naloxone and is likely sufficient to ensure safe and effective naloxone programming.

Role of funding source

This study was funded by an unrestricted grant from the Open Society Foundations; funder had no involvement in the design, implementation, or interpretation of study results or the decision to submit for publication.

Contributors

E. Behar contributed to research conception, study design, data collection and analysis, and manuscript preparation. G.M. Santos contributed to research conception, study design, data analysis and manuscript preparation. C. Rowe contributed to data analysis. E. Wheeler contributed to data collection. P.O. Coffin contributed to research conception, study design, data analysis and manuscript preparation. All authors have read and approved this version of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

No conflict declared.

Acknowledgements

Authors would like to thank the San Francisco AIDS Foundation for assistance with study activities. Additionally, the authors would like to acknowledge Rachel Grinstein and the staff and volunteers at the syringe access sites that provided naloxone education during the study.

References (16)

  • E.D. Barton et al.

    Efficacy of intranasal naloxone as a needleless alternative for treatment of opioid overdose in the prehospital setting

    J. Emerg. Med.

    (2005)
  • J.D. Jones et al.

    Brief overdose education can significantly increase accurate recognition of opioid overdose among heroin users

    Int. J. Drug Policy

    (2014)
  • Centers for Disease, Control, and Prevention

    CDC grand rounds: prescription drug overdoses – a U.S. epidemic

    MMWR

    (2012)
  • A.K. Clark et al.

    A systematic review of community opioid overdose prevention and naloxone distribution programs

    J. Addict. Med.

    (2014)
  • K. Dettmer et al.

    Take home naloxone and the prevention of deaths from opiate overdose: two pilot schemes

    BMJ

    (2001)
  • M. Doe-Simkins et al.

    Overdose rescues by trained and untrained participants and change in opioid use among substance-using participants in overdose education and naloxone distribution programs: a retrospective cohort study

    BMC Public Health

    (2014)
  • M. Doe-Simkins et al.

    Saved by the nose: bystander-administered intranasal naloxone hydrochloride for opioid overdose

    Am. J. Public Health

    (2009)
  • R.L. Gaston et al.

    Can we prevent drug related deaths by training opioid users to recognise and manage overdoses?

    Harm Reduct. J.

    (2009)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (0)

Supplementary material can be found by accessing the online version of this paper at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.12.009.

☆☆

The findings and conclusions in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the San Francisco Department of Public Health.

View full text