Suzanne Doyon1, Carleigh Benton2, Bruce A Anderson3, Michael Baier4, Erin Haas4, Lisa Hadley4, Jennifer Maehr5, Kathleen Rebbert-Franklin4, Yngvild Olsen6, Christopher Welsh7. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 2. University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, Maryland. 4. Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Behavioral Health Administration, Baltimore, Maryland. 5. Maryland Department of Juvenile Services, Baltimore, Maryland. 6. Institutes for Behavioral Resources, Baltimore, Maryland. 7. Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To help curb the opioid overdose epidemic, many states are implementing overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs. Few evaluations of these programs exist. Maryland's OEND program incorporated the services of the poison center. It asked bystanders to call the poison center within 2 hours of administration of naloxone. Bystanders included law enforcement (LE). OBJECTIVE: Description of the initial experience with this unique OEND program component. METHODS: Retrospective case series of all cases of bystander-administered naloxone reported to the Maryland Poison Center over 16 months. Cases were followed to final outcome, for example, hospital discharge or death. Indications for naloxone included suspected opioid exposure and unresponsiveness, respiratory depression, or cyanosis. Naloxone response was defined as person's ability to breathe, talk, or walk within minutes of administration. RESULTS: Seventy-eight cases of bystander-administered naloxone were reported. Positive response to naloxone was observed in 75.6% of overall cases. Response rates were 86.1% and 70.9% for suspected exposures to heroin and prescription opioids, respectively. Two individuals failed to respond to naloxone and died. DISCUSSION: Naloxone response rates were higher and admission to the intensive care unit rates were lower in heroin overdoses than prescription opioid overdoses. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective case series of 78 cases of bystander-administered naloxone reports a 75.6% overall rate of reversal. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: The findings of this study may be more generalizable. Incorporation of poison center services facilitated the capture of more timely data not usually available to OEND programs. (Am J Addict 2016;25:301-306).
BACKGROUND: To help curb the opioid overdose epidemic, many states are implementing overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs. Few evaluations of these programs exist. Maryland's OEND program incorporated the services of the poison center. It asked bystanders to call the poison center within 2 hours of administration of naloxone. Bystanders included law enforcement (LE). OBJECTIVE: Description of the initial experience with this unique OEND program component. METHODS: Retrospective case series of all cases of bystander-administered naloxone reported to the Maryland Poison Center over 16 months. Cases were followed to final outcome, for example, hospital discharge or death. Indications for naloxone included suspected opioid exposure and unresponsiveness, respiratory depression, or cyanosis. Naloxone response was defined as person's ability to breathe, talk, or walk within minutes of administration. RESULTS: Seventy-eight cases of bystander-administered naloxone were reported. Positive response to naloxone was observed in 75.6% of overall cases. Response rates were 86.1% and 70.9% for suspected exposures to heroin and prescription opioids, respectively. Two individuals failed to respond to naloxone and died. DISCUSSION: Naloxone response rates were higher and admission to the intensive care unit rates were lower in heroin overdoses than prescription opioid overdoses. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective case series of 78 cases of bystander-administered naloxone reports a 75.6% overall rate of reversal. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: The findings of this study may be more generalizable. Incorporation of poison center services facilitated the capture of more timely data not usually available to OEND programs. (Am J Addict 2016;25:301-306).
Authors: Peter Canning; Suzanne Doyon; Sarah Ali; Susan B Logan; Aliese Alter; Katherine Hart; Raffaella Coler; Richard Kamin; Steven C Wolf; Kristin Soto; Lauren Whiteman; Mark Jenkins Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2021 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Megan Buresh; Rachel E Gicquelais; Jacquie Astemborski; Gregory D Kirk; Shruti H Mehta; Becky L Genberg Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-03-11 Impact factor: 3.752