Emily Behar1,2, Christopher Rowe3, Glenn-Milo Santos3,4, Diana Coffa4, Caitlin Turner3, Nina C Santos3, Phillip O Coffin3,4. 1. San Francisco Department of Public Health, 25 Van Ness Avenue, Ste. 500, San Francisco, CA, 94102, USA. Emily.behar@ucsf.edu. 2. University of California, San Francisco, 500 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA. Emily.behar@ucsf.edu. 3. San Francisco Department of Public Health, 25 Van Ness Avenue, Ste. 500, San Francisco, CA, 94102, USA. 4. University of California, San Francisco, 500 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Naloxone co-prescription is recommended for patients on long-term opioids for pain, yet there are few data on the practice. OBJECTIVE: To explore naloxone co-prescribing acceptability among primary care providers for patients on long-term opioids. DESIGN: We surveyed providers at six safety-net primary care clinics in San Francisco that had initiated naloxone co-prescribing. Providers were encouraged to offer naloxone to patients on long-term opioids or otherwise at risk of witnessing or experiencing an overdose. Surveys were administered electronically 4 to 11 months after co-prescribing began. KEY RESULTS: One hundred eleven providers (69 %) responded to the survey, among whom 41.4 % were residents; 40.5 % practiced internal medicine and 55.0 % practiced family medicine. Most (79.3 %) prescribed naloxone, to a mean of 7.7 patients; 99.1 % were likely to prescribe naloxone in the future. Providers reported they were likely to prescribe naloxone to most patients, including those on low doses, defined as <20 morphine equivalent mg daily (59.8 %), ≥65 years old (83.9 %), with no overdose history (80.7 %), and with no substance use disorder (73.6 %). Most providers felt that prescribing naloxone did not affect their opioid prescribing, 22.5 % felt that they might prescribe fewer opioids, and 3.6 % felt that they might prescribe more. Concerns about providing naloxone were largely administrative, relating to time and pharmacy or payer logistics. Internists (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.49, 95 % CI = 0.26-0.93, p = 0.029), those licensed for 5-20 years (IRR = 2.10, 95 % CI = 1.35-3.25, p = 0.001), and those with more patients prescribed long-term opioids (IRR = 1.10, 95 % CI = 1.05-1.14, p <0.001) were independently more likely to prescribe a greater number of naloxone compared to participants without these exposures. CONCLUSIONS: Naloxone co-prescription is considered acceptable among primary care providers. Barriers such as time and dispensing logistics may be alleviated by novel naloxone formulations intended for laypersons recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
BACKGROUND: Naloxone co-prescription is recommended for patients on long-term opioids for pain, yet there are few data on the practice. OBJECTIVE: To explore naloxone co-prescribing acceptability among primary care providers for patients on long-term opioids. DESIGN: We surveyed providers at six safety-net primary care clinics in San Francisco that had initiated naloxone co-prescribing. Providers were encouraged to offer naloxone to patients on long-term opioids or otherwise at risk of witnessing or experiencing an overdose. Surveys were administered electronically 4 to 11 months after co-prescribing began. KEY RESULTS: One hundred eleven providers (69 %) responded to the survey, among whom 41.4 % were residents; 40.5 % practiced internal medicine and 55.0 % practiced family medicine. Most (79.3 %) prescribed naloxone, to a mean of 7.7 patients; 99.1 % were likely to prescribe naloxone in the future. Providers reported they were likely to prescribe naloxone to most patients, including those on low doses, defined as <20 morphine equivalent mg daily (59.8 %), ≥65 years old (83.9 %), with no overdose history (80.7 %), and with no substance use disorder (73.6 %). Most providers felt that prescribing naloxone did not affect their opioid prescribing, 22.5 % felt that they might prescribe fewer opioids, and 3.6 % felt that they might prescribe more. Concerns about providing naloxone were largely administrative, relating to time and pharmacy or payer logistics. Internists (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.49, 95 % CI = 0.26-0.93, p = 0.029), those licensed for 5-20 years (IRR = 2.10, 95 % CI = 1.35-3.25, p = 0.001), and those with more patients prescribed long-term opioids (IRR = 1.10, 95 % CI = 1.05-1.14, p <0.001) were independently more likely to prescribe a greater number of naloxone compared to participants without these exposures. CONCLUSIONS: Naloxone co-prescription is considered acceptable among primary care providers. Barriers such as time and dispensing logistics may be alleviated by novel naloxone formulations intended for laypersons recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Entities:
Keywords:
naloxone co-prescription; opioid analgesics; opioid overdose; primary care
Authors: Leo Beletsky; Robin Ruthazer; Grace E Macalino; Josiah D Rich; Litjen Tan; Scott Burris Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Su Albert; Fred W Brason; Catherine K Sanford; Nabarun Dasgupta; Jim Graham; Beth Lovette Journal: Pain Med Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Ingrid A Binswanger; Stephen Koester; Shane R Mueller; Edward M Gardner; Kristin Goddard; Jason M Glanz Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Shane R Mueller; Alexander Y Walley; Susan L Calcaterra; Jason M Glanz; Ingrid A Binswanger Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2015-03-16 Impact factor: 3.716
Authors: Christopher Rowe; Glenn-Milo Santos; Eric Vittinghoff; Eliza Wheeler; Peter Davidson; Philip O Coffin Journal: Addiction Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Alexander Y Walley; Ziming Xuan; H Holly Hackman; Emily Quinn; Maya Doe-Simkins; Amy Sorensen-Alawad; Sarah Ruiz; Al Ozonoff Journal: BMJ Date: 2013-01-30
Authors: Jonathan E Freise; Elizabeth E McCarthy; Michelle Guy; Scott Steiger; Leslie Sheu Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Andrea Jakubowski; Alexander Pappas; Lee Isaacsohn; Felipe Castillo; Mariya Masyukova; Richard Silvera; Louisa Holaday; Evan Rausch; Sameen Farooq; Keith T Veltri; Chinazo O Cunningham; Marcus A Bachhuber Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2018-11-26 Impact factor: 3.716
Authors: Traci C Green; Corey Davis; Ziming Xuan; Alexander Y Walley; Jeffrey Bratberg Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2020-04-16 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Susan L Calcaterra; Ingrid A Binswanger; E Jennifer Edelman; Bryan K McNair; Sarah E Wakeman; Patrick G O'Connor Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2020-04-08 Impact factor: 3.716
Authors: Lewei Allison Lin; Chad M Brummett; Jennifer F Waljee; Michael J Englesbe; Vidhya Gunaseelan; Amy S B Bohnert Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 5.128