Disruptions to naloxone training among lay and occupational responders in Maryland during the emergence of COVID-19: early impacts, recovery, and lessons learned.
COVID-19
harm reduction
naloxone
overdose prevention
Journal
Drug and alcohol dependence reports
ISSN: 2772-7246
Titre abrégé: Drug Alcohol Depend Rep
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9918350383506676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Jun 2023
16 Jun 2023
Historique:
received:
22
03
2023
revised:
01
06
2023
accepted:
05
06
2023
medline:
26
6
2023
pubmed:
26
6
2023
entrez:
26
6
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
: Opioid overdose death rates increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Disruptions in community-based naloxone trainings could have reduced the likelihood of overdose reversal and increased the chances of a fatal overdose. We investigated changes in the number of people trained in naloxone administration and distribution in Maryland before, during, and after COVID-related stay-at-home orders. : Data on naloxone training are from the Maryland Department of Health. We used interrupted time series models to estimate changes in average monthly number of people trained: [1] pre-interruption (4/2019-3/2020), [2] 1-month post-interruption (4/2020-5/2020), and [3] 12-months post-interruption (4/2020-3/2021). Trainees were classified as lay (e.g., people who use drugs) or occupational (e.g., law enforcement officers and harm reduction workers) responders. : There were 101,332 trainees; 54.1% lay, 21.5% occupational, and 23.4% unknown responder status. We observed a decrease in the average monthly number of trainees in the pre-interruption period (-235, : Findings suggest a marked decrease in naloxone trainees immediately after stay-at-home order, followed by a moderate rebound in the 12-months after stay-at-home order. The decrease in occupational responders trained may have limited access to naloxone, but would likely have been offset by increases in number of lay responders trained. Strengthening lay and occupational responder connections could maintain naloxone distribution during public health crises.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
: Opioid overdose death rates increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Disruptions in community-based naloxone trainings could have reduced the likelihood of overdose reversal and increased the chances of a fatal overdose. We investigated changes in the number of people trained in naloxone administration and distribution in Maryland before, during, and after COVID-related stay-at-home orders.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
: Data on naloxone training are from the Maryland Department of Health. We used interrupted time series models to estimate changes in average monthly number of people trained: [1] pre-interruption (4/2019-3/2020), [2] 1-month post-interruption (4/2020-5/2020), and [3] 12-months post-interruption (4/2020-3/2021). Trainees were classified as lay (e.g., people who use drugs) or occupational (e.g., law enforcement officers and harm reduction workers) responders.
Results
UNASSIGNED
: There were 101,332 trainees; 54.1% lay, 21.5% occupational, and 23.4% unknown responder status. We observed a decrease in the average monthly number of trainees in the pre-interruption period (-235,
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
: Findings suggest a marked decrease in naloxone trainees immediately after stay-at-home order, followed by a moderate rebound in the 12-months after stay-at-home order. The decrease in occupational responders trained may have limited access to naloxone, but would likely have been offset by increases in number of lay responders trained. Strengthening lay and occupational responder connections could maintain naloxone distribution during public health crises.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37362079
doi: 10.1016/j.dadr.2023.100173
pii: S2772-7246(23)00043-4
pmc: PMC10271935
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100173Subventions
Organisme : NIDA NIH HHS
ID : T32 DA007292
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Author(s).
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None
Références
BMC Public Health. 2022 Jun 4;22(1):1124
pubmed: 35659285
JAMA Psychiatry. 2021 Apr 1;78(4):372-379
pubmed: 33533876
Am J Public Health. 2021 Jun;111(6):1013-1017
pubmed: 33950718
Subst Abus. 2022;43(1):988-992
pubmed: 35435812
Public Health Rep. 2021 May;136(3):301-308
pubmed: 33673755
Int J Drug Policy. 2020 Sep;83:102872
pubmed: 32713765
BMC Public Health. 2014 Apr 01;14:297
pubmed: 24684801
J Subst Abuse Treat. 2021 Mar;122:108220
pubmed: 33309390
Int J Drug Policy. 2022 Sep;107:103787
pubmed: 35849935
Health Aff (Millwood). 2020 Jul;39(7):1237-1246
pubmed: 32407171
Subst Abus. 2022;43(1):993-998
pubmed: 35435800
Int J Drug Policy. 2021 Aug;94:103199
pubmed: 33765515
Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2022 May 4;48(3):338-346
pubmed: 35467459
AIDS Behav. 2020 Sep;24(9):2466-2468
pubmed: 32333209
Am J Crim Justice. 2020;45(4):690-701
pubmed: 32837154
Am J Public Health. 2021 Jul;111(7):1284-1291
pubmed: 33856885
JAMA. 2021 Jul 6;326(1):84-86
pubmed: 34019096
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 16;19(4):
pubmed: 35206421
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2015 Mar 1;148:209-12
pubmed: 25595053
Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2021 Nov 13;16(1):68
pubmed: 34774106
BMJ. 2013 Jan 30;346:f174
pubmed: 23372174