Addressing System and Clinician Barriers to Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine: An Evaluation of Post-intervention Physician Outcomes.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.5811/westjem.18320
Jacqueline J Mahal, Polly Bijur, Audrey Sloma, Joanna Starrels, Tiffany Lu
{"title":"Addressing System and Clinician Barriers to Emergency Department-initiated Buprenorphine: An Evaluation of Post-intervention Physician Outcomes.","authors":"Jacqueline J Mahal, Polly Bijur, Audrey Sloma, Joanna Starrels, Tiffany Lu","doi":"10.5811/westjem.18320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Emergency departments (ED) are in the unique position to initiate buprenorphine, an evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, barriers at the system and clinician level limit its use. We describe a series of interventions that address these barriers to ED-initiated buprenorphine in one urban ED. We compare post-intervention physician outcomes between the study site and two affiliated sites without the interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a cross-sectional study conducted at three affiliated urban EDs where the intervention site implemented OUD-related electronic note templates, clinical protocols, a peer navigation program, education, and reminders. Post-intervention, we administered an anonymous, online survey to physicians at all three sites. Survey domains included demographics, buprenorphine experience and knowledge, comfort with addressing OUD, and attitudes toward OUD treatment. Physician outcomes were compared between the intervention site and the control sites with bivariate tests. We used logistic regression controlling for significant demographic differences to compare physicians' buprenorphine experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 113 (51%) eligible physicians, 58 completed the survey: 27 from the intervention site, and 31 from the control sites. Physicians at the intervention site were more likely to spend <75% of their work week in clinical practice and to be in medical practice for <7 years. Buprenorphine knowledge (including status of buprenorphine prescribing waiver), comfort with addressing OUD, and attitudes toward OUD treatment did not differ significantly between the sites. Physicians were 4.5 times more likely to have administered buprenorphine at the intervention site (odds ratio [OR] 4.5, 95% confidence interval 1.4-14.4, <i>P</i> = 0.01), which remained significant after adjusting for clinical time and years in practice, (OR 3.5 and 4.6, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Physicians exposed to interventions addressing system- and clinician-level implementation barriers were at least three times as likely to have administered buprenorphine in the ED. Physicians' buprenorphine knowledge, comfort with addressing and attitudes toward OUD treatment did not differ significantly between sites. Our findings suggest that ED-initiated buprenorphine can be facilitated by addressing implementation barriers, while physician knowledge, comfort, and attitudes may be harder to improve.</p>","PeriodicalId":23682,"journal":{"name":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"25 3","pages":"303-311"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11112658/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.18320","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Emergency departments (ED) are in the unique position to initiate buprenorphine, an evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). However, barriers at the system and clinician level limit its use. We describe a series of interventions that address these barriers to ED-initiated buprenorphine in one urban ED. We compare post-intervention physician outcomes between the study site and two affiliated sites without the interventions.

Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted at three affiliated urban EDs where the intervention site implemented OUD-related electronic note templates, clinical protocols, a peer navigation program, education, and reminders. Post-intervention, we administered an anonymous, online survey to physicians at all three sites. Survey domains included demographics, buprenorphine experience and knowledge, comfort with addressing OUD, and attitudes toward OUD treatment. Physician outcomes were compared between the intervention site and the control sites with bivariate tests. We used logistic regression controlling for significant demographic differences to compare physicians' buprenorphine experience.

Results: Of 113 (51%) eligible physicians, 58 completed the survey: 27 from the intervention site, and 31 from the control sites. Physicians at the intervention site were more likely to spend <75% of their work week in clinical practice and to be in medical practice for <7 years. Buprenorphine knowledge (including status of buprenorphine prescribing waiver), comfort with addressing OUD, and attitudes toward OUD treatment did not differ significantly between the sites. Physicians were 4.5 times more likely to have administered buprenorphine at the intervention site (odds ratio [OR] 4.5, 95% confidence interval 1.4-14.4, P = 0.01), which remained significant after adjusting for clinical time and years in practice, (OR 3.5 and 4.6, respectively).

Conclusion: Physicians exposed to interventions addressing system- and clinician-level implementation barriers were at least three times as likely to have administered buprenorphine in the ED. Physicians' buprenorphine knowledge, comfort with addressing and attitudes toward OUD treatment did not differ significantly between sites. Our findings suggest that ED-initiated buprenorphine can be facilitated by addressing implementation barriers, while physician knowledge, comfort, and attitudes may be harder to improve.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解决急诊科启动丁丙诺啡的系统和临床医生障碍:对干预后医生成果的评估。
简介:急诊科(ED)在启动丁丙诺啡治疗阿片类药物使用障碍(OUD)的循证治疗方面具有得天独厚的优势。然而,系统和临床医生层面的障碍限制了其使用。我们介绍了在一个城市急诊室针对急诊室启动丁丙诺啡治疗的这些障碍所采取的一系列干预措施。我们比较了研究地点和两个未采取干预措施的附属地点的干预后医生治疗效果:这是一项横断面研究,在三个附属的城市急诊室进行,干预地点实施了与 OUD 相关的电子病历模板、临床协议、同伴导航计划、教育和提醒。干预后,我们对所有三个地点的医生进行了匿名在线调查。调查内容包括人口统计学、丁丙诺啡经验和知识、处理 OUD 的舒适度以及对 OUD 治疗的态度。通过双变量检验比较了干预地点和对照地点的医生治疗结果。我们使用逻辑回归控制显著的人口统计学差异来比较医生的丁丙诺啡经验:在 113 名(51%)符合条件的医生中,58 人完成了调查:其中 27 人来自干预地点,31 人来自对照地点。干预地点的医生更有可能使用丁丙诺啡(P = 0.01),在调整临床时间和执业年限后,这一结果仍然显著(OR 分别为 3.5 和 4.6):结论:接受干预措施以解决系统和临床医生层面的实施障碍的医生在急诊室使用丁丙诺啡的可能性至少是普通医生的三倍。不同地点的医生对丁丙诺啡的了解程度、处理问题的舒适度以及对 OUD 治疗的态度没有显著差异。我们的研究结果表明,可以通过解决实施障碍来促进由急诊室发起的丁丙诺啡治疗,而医生的知识、舒适度和态度可能较难改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
125
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: WestJEM focuses on how the systems and delivery of emergency care affects health, health disparities, and health outcomes in communities and populations worldwide, including the impact of social conditions on the composition of patients seeking care in emergency departments.
期刊最新文献
Impact of Prehospital Ultrasound Training on Simulated Paramedic Clinical Decision-Making. Interfacility Patient Transfers During COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed-Methods Study. Making A Difference: Launching a Multimodal, Resident-Run Social Emergency Medicine Program. Methadone Initiation in the Emergency Department for Opioid Use Disorder. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Sepsis in Adult Patients Meeting Two or More Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1