Opioid overdose reversals using naloxone in New York City by people who use opioids:Implications for public health and overdose harm reduction approaches from a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Adverse reactions to naloxone, such as withdrawal symptoms and aggression, are widely recognised in the literature by pharmaceutical manufacturers and clinical practitioners as standard reactions of individuals who are physically dependent upon opioid drugs following the reversal of potentially fatal opioid overdose. This paper seeks to provide a differentiated view on reactions to naloxone that may have important implications for public health and harm reduction approaches. METHODS: Analyses from a qualitative investigation embedded within a 5-year Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) examined the risks and benefits of Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) training models (brief or extended training) in various populations of people who use opioids in New York City. The qualitative experiences (obtained through semi-structured interviews) of 46 people who use opioids and who were each involved in the delivery of naloxone, during 56 separate overdose events that occurred throughout 2016–2018, were studied. Situational analysis and inductive content analysis of interview data focused upon overdose reversals in an attempt to provide understandings of the various adverse effects associated with naloxone from their perspective. These analyses were supplemented by data sessions within the research team during which the findings obtained from situational analysis and inductive content analysis were reviewed and complemented by deductive (clinical) appraisals of the various physical and psychological effects associated with the overdose reversals. RESULTS: People who use opioids recognise three distinct and interconnected outcomes that may follow a successful opioid overdose reversal after intramuscular or intranasal administration of naloxone. These outcomes are here termed, i) ‘rage’ (describing a wide range of angry, hostile and/or aggressive outbursts), ii) ‘withdrawal symptoms,’ and iii) ‘not rage, not withdrawal’ (i.e., a wide range of short-lived, ‘harmless’ conditions (such as temporary amnesia, mild emotional outbursts, or physical discomfort) that do not include rage or withdrawal symptoms). CONCLUSION: Physical and psychological reactions to naloxone should not be understood exclusively as a consequence of acute, opioid-related, withdrawal symptoms. The three distinct and interconnected reversal outcomes identified in this study are considered from a harm reduction policy perspective and are further framed by concepts associated with ‘mediated toxicity’ (i.e. harm triggered by medicine). The overall conclusion is that harm reduction training programmes that are aligned to the policy and practice of take home naloxone may be strengthened by including awareness and training in how to best respond to ‘rage’ associated with overdose reversal following naloxone administration by people who use opioids and other laypersons

A qualitative study of repeat naloxone administrations during opioid overdose intervention by people who use opioids in New York City.

BACKGROUND: Take-home naloxone (THN) kits have been designed to provide community members (including people who use drugs, their families and/or significant others) with the necessary resources to address out-of-hospital opioid overdose events. Kits typically include two doses of naloxone. This 'twin-pack' format means that lay responders need information on how to use each dose. Advice given tends to be based on dosage algorithms used by medical personnel. However, little is currently known about how and why people who use drugs, acting as lay responders, decide to administer the second dose contained within single THN kits. The aim of this article is to explore this issue. METHODS: Data were generated from a qualitative semi-structured interview study that was embedded within a randomised controlled trial examining the risks and benefits of Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) training in New York City (NYC). Analysis for this article focuses upon the experiences of 22 people who use(d) opioids and who provided repeat naloxone administrations (RNA) during 24 separate overdose events. The framework method of analysis was used to compare the time participants believed had passed between each naloxone dose administered (‘subjective response interval’) with the ‘recommended response interval’ (2-4 minutes) given during OEND training. Framework analysis also charted the various reasons and rationale for providing RNA during overdose interventions. RESULTS: When participants’ subjective response intervals were compared with the recommended response interval for naloxone dosing, three different time periods were reported for the 24 overdose events: i. ‘two doses administered in under 2 minutes’ (n=10); ii. ‘two doses administered within 2-4 minutes’ (n=7), and iii. ‘two doses administered more than 4 minutes apart’ (n=7). A variety of reasons were identified for providing RNA within each of the three categories of response interval. Collectively, reasons for RNA included panic, recognition of urgency, delays in retrieving naloxone kit, perceptions of recipients’ responsiveness/non-responsiveness to naloxone, and avoidance of Emergency Response Teams (ERT). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that decision-making processes by people who use opioids regarding how and when to provide RNA are influenced by factors that relate to the emergency event. In addition, the majority of RNA (17/24) occurred outside of the recommended response interval taught during OEND training. These findings are discussed in terms of evidence-based intervention and ‘evidence-making intervention’ with suggestions for how RNA guidance may be developed and included within future/existing models of OEND training

Do treatment improvements in PTSD severity affect substance use outcomes? A secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial in NIDA’s Clinical Trials Network

Objective: The purpose of the analysis was to examine the temporal course of improvement in symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance use disorder among women in outpatient substance abuse treatment. Method: Participants were 353 women randomly assigned to 12 sessions of either trauma-focused or health education group treatment. PTSD andsubstance use assessments were conducted during treatment and posttreatment at 1 week and after 3, 6, and 12 months. A continuous Markov model was fit on four defined response categories (nonresponse, substance use response, PTSD response, or global response [improvement in bothPTSD and substance use]) to investigate the temporal association between improvement in PTSD and substance use symptom severity during the study\u27s treatment phase. A generalized linear model was applied to test this relationship over the follow-up period. Results: Subjects exhibiting nonresponse, substance use response, or global response tended to maintain original classification; subjects exhibiting PTSD response were significantly more likely to transition to global response over time, indicating maintained PTSD improvement was associated with subsequent substance use improvement. Trauma-focused treatment was significantly more effective than health education in achieving substance use improvement, but only among those who were heavy substance users at baseline and had achieved significant PTSDreductions. Conclusions: PTSD severity reductions were more likely to be associated with substance use improvement, with minimal evidence of substanceuse symptom reduction improving PTSD symptoms. Results support the self-medication model of coping with PTSD symptoms and an empirical basis for integrated interventions for improved substance use outcomes in patients with severe symptoms

Adverse events in an integrated trauma-focused intervention for women in community substance abuse treatment

A substantial number of women who enter substance abuse treatment have a history of trauma and meet criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Fear regarding the extent to which PTSD treatment can evoke negative consequences remains a research question. This study explored adverse events related to the implementation of an integrated treatment for women with trauma and substance use disorder (Seeking Safety) compared with a non trauma-focused intervention (Women\u27s Health Education). Three hundred fifty-three women enrolled in community substanceabuse treatment were randomized to 1 of the 2 study groups and monitored weekly for adverse events. There were no differences between the two intervention groups in the number of women reporting study-related adverse events (28 [9.6%] for the Seeking Safety group and 21[7.2%] for the Women\u27s Health Education group). Implementing PTSD treatment in substance abuse treatment programs appears to be safe, with minimal impact on intervention-related adverse psychiatric and substance abuse symptoms. More research is needed on the efficacy of such interventions to improve outcomes of PTSD and substance use