Intranasal versus Intramuscular/Intravenous Naloxone for Pre-hospital Opioid Overdose: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Drug Administration Routes Emergency Medical Services Naloxone Opioid-Related Disorders Substance-Related Disorders

Journal

Advanced journal of emergency medicine
ISSN: 2588-400X
Titre abrégé: Adv J Emerg Med
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101745107

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
entrez: 24 4 2020
pubmed: 24 4 2020
medline: 24 4 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to perform an extensive search in databases to compare the efficacy of the intranasal administration of naloxone with its intramuscular/intravenous administration in the pre-hospital management of opioid overdose. This meta-analysis included controlled trials conducted on the efficacy of naloxone administration in the pre-hospital management of opioid overdose. A search was carried out in electronic databases on relevant articles published by the end of 2018. After data collection, analyses were performed in STATA 14.0 software and the efficacy and side-effects of the two administration routes of naloxone, i.e. intranasal and intramuscular/intravenous, were compared. An overall effect size with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was provided for each section. Eventually, data from six studies were included in this meta-analysis. The success rate of the intranasal and intramuscular/intravenous administration of naloxone in the management of opioid overdose in pre-hospital settings was 82.54% (95% CI: 57.97 to 97.89%) and 80.39% (95% CI: 57.38 to 96.04%), respectively. There was no difference between injectable (intramuscular/intravenous) naloxone and intranasal naloxone in the pre-hospital management of opioid overdose (Odds Ratio=1.01; 95% CI: 0.42 to 2.43; P=0.98). The onset of action of intranasal naloxone, however, was slightly longer than injectable naloxone (Standardized Mean Difference=0.63; 95% CI: 0.07 to 1.19; P=0.03). Additionally, the odds of needing a rescue dose was 2.17 times higher for intranasal naloxone than intramuscular/intravenous naloxone (OR=2.17; 95% CI: 1.53 to 3.09; P<0.0001). The prevalence of major side-effects was non-significant for both intranasal (0.00%) and intramuscular/intravenous (0.05%) routes of naloxone administration and there was no difference in the prevalence of major (OR=1.18; 95% CI: 0.38 to 3.69; P=0.777) and minor (OR=0.64; 95% CI: 0.17 to 2.34; P=0.497) side-effects between the two routes. The present meta-analysis demonstrated that intranasal naloxone is as effective as injectable naloxone in the pre-hospital management of opioid overdose complications. Consequently, intranasal naloxone may be an appropriate alternative to injectable naloxone.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32322795
doi: 10.22114/ajem.v0i0.279
pii: AJEM-4-e27
pmc: PMC7163267
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

e27

Informations de copyright

© 2020 Tehran University of Medical Sciences.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest None declared.

Références

J Pharm Pract. 2018 Feb;31(1):91-98
pubmed: 28399697
Neuroscience. 2016 May 13;322:377-97
pubmed: 26917272
Emerg (Tehran). 2017;5(1):e37
pubmed: 28286844
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011 Nov 4;60(43):1487-92
pubmed: 22048730
Emerg (Tehran). 2015 Fall;3(4):127-36
pubmed: 26495401
Emerg (Tehran). 2016 Summer;4(3):116-26
pubmed: 27299139
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2009 Oct-Dec;13(4):512-5
pubmed: 19731165
Addiction. 2009 Dec;104(12):2067-74
pubmed: 19922572
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Aug 18;151(4):264-9, W64
pubmed: 19622511
Am J Emerg Med. 2010 Mar;28(3):296-303
pubmed: 20223386
J Emerg Med. 2005 Oct;29(3):265-71
pubmed: 16183444
Tanaffos. 2014;13(4):29-40
pubmed: 25852759
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015 Sep;21(9):1537-44
pubmed: 25985918
Med J Aust. 2005 Jan 3;182(1):24-7
pubmed: 15651944
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 May;31(5):929-35
pubmed: 26642423
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016 Dec 30;65(50-51):1445-1452
pubmed: 28033313
Ann Intern Med. 2017 Dec 19;167(12):867-875
pubmed: 29181532
Arch Med Sci. 2014 May 12;10(2):309-14
pubmed: 24904666
Emerg (Tehran). 2016 Winter;4(1):1-10
pubmed: 26862542
BMJ. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):629-34
pubmed: 9310563

Auteurs

Mahmoud Yousefifard (M)

Physiology Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran Iran.

Mohammad Hossein Vazirizadeh-Mahabadi (MH)

Student Research Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Arian Madani Neishaboori (AM)

Physiology Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran Iran.

Seyedeh Niloufar Rafiei Alavi (SNR)

Physiology Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran Iran.

Marzieh Amiri (M)

Department of Emergency Medicine, Razi Hospital, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.

Alireza Baratloo (A)

Prehospital and Hospital Emergency Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Sina Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Peyman Saberian (P)

Prehospital and Hospital Emergency Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Anesthesiology, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Classifications MeSH