Jason M Glanz1,2, Komal J Narwaney3, Shane R Mueller3, Edward M Gardner4, Susan L Calcaterra4,5, Stanley Xu3,6, Kristin Breslin4, Ingrid A Binswanger3,5. 1. Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, CO, USA. jason.m.glanz@kp.org. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Colorado School of Public Health, Denver, CO, USA. jason.m.glanz@kp.org. 3. Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, CO, USA. 4. Denver Health and Hospital Authority, Denver, CO, USA. 5. Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, CO, USA. 6. Department of Epidemiology, Colorado School of Public Health, Denver, CO, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Naloxone is a life-saving opioid antagonist. Chronic pain guidelines recommend that physicians co-prescribe naloxone to patients at high risk for opioid overdose. However, clinical tools to efficiently identify patients who could benefit from naloxone are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an overdose predictive model which could be used in primary care settings to assess the need for naloxone. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Derivation site was an integrated health system in Colorado; validation site was a safety-net health system in Colorado. PARTICIPANTS: We developed a predictive model in a cohort of 42,828 patients taking chronic opioid therapy and externally validated the model in 10,708 patients. MAIN MEASURES: Potential predictors and outcomes (nonfatal pharmaceutical and heroin overdoses) were extracted from electronic health records. Fatal overdose outcomes were identified from state vital records. To match the approximate shelf-life of naloxone, we used Cox proportional hazards regression to model the 2-year risk of overdose. Calibration and discrimination were assessed. KEY RESULTS: A five-variable predictive model showed good calibration and discrimination (bootstrap-corrected c-statistic = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.78) in the derivation site, with sensitivity of 66.1% and specificity of 66.6%. In the validation site, the model showed good discrimination (c-statistic = 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.80) and less than ideal calibration, with sensitivity and specificity of 82.2% and 49.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients on chronic opioid therapy, the predictive model identified 66-82% of all subsequent opioid overdoses. This model is an efficient screening tool to identify patients who could benefit from naloxone to prevent overdose deaths. Population differences across the two sites limited calibration in the validation site.
BACKGROUND:Naloxone is a life-saving opioid antagonist. Chronic pain guidelines recommend that physicians co-prescribe naloxone to patients at high risk for opioid overdose. However, clinical tools to efficiently identify patients who could benefit from naloxone are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an overdose predictive model which could be used in primary care settings to assess the need for naloxone. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Derivation site was an integrated health system in Colorado; validation site was a safety-net health system in Colorado. PARTICIPANTS: We developed a predictive model in a cohort of 42,828 patients taking chronic opioid therapy and externally validated the model in 10,708 patients. MAIN MEASURES: Potential predictors and outcomes (nonfatal pharmaceutical and heroin overdoses) were extracted from electronic health records. Fatal overdose outcomes were identified from state vital records. To match the approximate shelf-life of naloxone, we used Cox proportional hazards regression to model the 2-year risk of overdose. Calibration and discrimination were assessed. KEY RESULTS: A five-variable predictive model showed good calibration and discrimination (bootstrap-corrected c-statistic = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.78) in the derivation site, with sensitivity of 66.1% and specificity of 66.6%. In the validation site, the model showed good discrimination (c-statistic = 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.80) and less than ideal calibration, with sensitivity and specificity of 82.2% and 49.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients on chronic opioid therapy, the predictive model identified 66-82% of all subsequent opioid overdoses. This model is an efficient screening tool to identify patients who could benefit from naloxone to prevent overdose deaths. Population differences across the two sites limited calibration in the validation site.
Entities:
Keywords:
naloxone; opioids; overdose; predictive model; substance use disorder
Authors: Karel G M Moons; Andre Pascal Kengne; Diederick E Grobbee; Patrick Royston; Yvonne Vergouwe; Douglas G Altman; Mark Woodward Journal: Heart Date: 2012-03-07 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Matthew Daubresse; Hsien-Yen Chang; Yuping Yu; Shilpa Viswanathan; Nilay D Shah; Randall S Stafford; Stefan P Kruszewski; G Caleb Alexander Journal: Med Care Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: K Michelle Peavy; Caleb J Banta-Green; Susan Kingston; Michael Hanrahan; Joseph O Merrill; Phillip O Coffin Journal: J Psychoactive Drugs Date: 2012 Jul-Aug
Authors: Carla A Green; Nancy A Perrin; Shannon L Janoff; Cynthia I Campbell; Howard D Chilcoat; Paul M Coplan Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Matthew Miller; Catherine W Barber; Sarah Leatherman; Jennifer Fonda; John A Hermos; Kelly Cho; David R Gagnon Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Michael Von Korff; Michael Von Korff; Kathleen Saunders; Gary Thomas Ray; Denise Boudreau; Cynthia Campbell; Joseph Merrill; Mark D Sullivan; Carolyn M Rutter; Michael J Silverberg; Caleb Banta-Green; Constance Weisner Journal: Clin J Pain Date: 2008 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 3.442
Authors: Christopher M Jones; Joseph Logan; R Matthew Gladden; Michele K Bohm Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2015-07-10 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Hsien-Yen Chang; Noa Krawczyk; Kristin E Schneider; Lindsey Ferris; Matthew Eisenberg; Tom M Richards; B Casey Lyons; Kate Jackson; Jonathan P Weiner; Brendan Saloner Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-06-07 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Jo Ann Shoup; Shane R Mueller; Ingrid A Binswanger; Anna V Williams; John Strang; Jason M Glanz Journal: Pain Med Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Bradley D Stein; Christopher M Jones; Rosanna Smart; Flora Sheng; Mark Sorbero Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-02-03 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Noa Krawczyk; Matthew Eisenberg; Kristin E Schneider; Tom M Richards; B Casey Lyons; Kate Jackson; Lindsey Ferris; Jonathan P Weiner; Brendan Saloner Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2019-09-09 Impact factor: 5.721