Harm Reduction in the Field: First Responders' Perceptions of Opioid Overdose Interventions.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.5811/westjem.18033
Callan Elswick Fockele, Tessa Frohe, Owen McBride, David L Perlmutter, Brenda Goh, Grover Williams, Courteney Wettemann, Nathan Holland, Brad Finegood, Thea Oliphant-Wells, Emily C Williams, Jenna van Draanen
{"title":"Harm Reduction in the Field: First Responders' Perceptions of Opioid Overdose Interventions.","authors":"Callan Elswick Fockele, Tessa Frohe, Owen McBride, David L Perlmutter, Brenda Goh, Grover Williams, Courteney Wettemann, Nathan Holland, Brad Finegood, Thea Oliphant-Wells, Emily C Williams, Jenna van Draanen","doi":"10.5811/westjem.18033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Recent policy changes in Washington State presented a unique opportunity to pair evidence-based interventions with first responder services to combat increasing opioid overdoses. However, little is known about how these interventions should be implemented. In partnership with the Research with Expert Advisors on Drug Use team, a group of academically trained and community-trained researchers with lived and living experience of substance use, we examined facilitators and barriers to adopting leave-behind naloxone, field-based buprenorphine initiation, and HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing for first responder programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our team completed semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 32 first responders, mobile integrated health staff, and emergency medical services (EMS) leaders in King County, Washington, from February-May 2022. Semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded using an integrated deductive and inductive thematic analysis approach grounded in community-engaged research principles. We collected data until saturation was achieved. Data collection and analysis were informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Two investigators coded independently until 100% consensus was reached.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our thematic analysis revealed several perceived facilitators (ie, tension for change, relative advantage, and compatibility) and barriers (ie, limited adaptability, lack of evidence strength and quality, and prohibitive cost) to the adoption of these evidence-based clinical interventions for first responder systems. There was widespread support for the distribution of leave-behind naloxone, although funding was identified as a barrier. Many believed field-based initiation of buprenorphine treatment could provide a more effective response to overdose management, but there were significant concerns that this intervention could run counter to the rapid care model. Lastly, participants worried that HIV and HCV testing was inappropriate for first responders to conduct but recommended that this service be provided by mobile integrated health staff.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results have informed local EMS strategic planning, which will inform roll out of process improvements in King County, Washington. Future work should evaluate the impact of these interventions on the health of overdose survivors.</p>","PeriodicalId":23682,"journal":{"name":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11254139/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.18033","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: Recent policy changes in Washington State presented a unique opportunity to pair evidence-based interventions with first responder services to combat increasing opioid overdoses. However, little is known about how these interventions should be implemented. In partnership with the Research with Expert Advisors on Drug Use team, a group of academically trained and community-trained researchers with lived and living experience of substance use, we examined facilitators and barriers to adopting leave-behind naloxone, field-based buprenorphine initiation, and HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing for first responder programs.

Methods: Our team completed semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 32 first responders, mobile integrated health staff, and emergency medical services (EMS) leaders in King County, Washington, from February-May 2022. Semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded using an integrated deductive and inductive thematic analysis approach grounded in community-engaged research principles. We collected data until saturation was achieved. Data collection and analysis were informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Two investigators coded independently until 100% consensus was reached.

Results: Our thematic analysis revealed several perceived facilitators (ie, tension for change, relative advantage, and compatibility) and barriers (ie, limited adaptability, lack of evidence strength and quality, and prohibitive cost) to the adoption of these evidence-based clinical interventions for first responder systems. There was widespread support for the distribution of leave-behind naloxone, although funding was identified as a barrier. Many believed field-based initiation of buprenorphine treatment could provide a more effective response to overdose management, but there were significant concerns that this intervention could run counter to the rapid care model. Lastly, participants worried that HIV and HCV testing was inappropriate for first responders to conduct but recommended that this service be provided by mobile integrated health staff.

Conclusion: These results have informed local EMS strategic planning, which will inform roll out of process improvements in King County, Washington. Future work should evaluate the impact of these interventions on the health of overdose survivors.

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
现场减害:急救人员对阿片类药物过量干预措施的看法。
导言:华盛顿州最近的政策变化提供了一个独特的机会,将循证干预措施与急救人员服务相结合,以应对日益增多的阿片类药物过量问题。然而,人们对如何实施这些干预措施知之甚少。我们与药物使用专家顾问研究团队(由受过学术训练和社区训练的研究人员组成,具有药物使用的生活经验)合作,研究了在急救人员计划中采用留置纳洛酮、基于现场的丁丙诺啡启动以及 HIV 和丙型肝炎病毒(HCV)检测的促进因素和障碍:我们的团队在 2022 年 2 月至 5 月期间对华盛顿州金县的 32 名急救人员、移动综合医疗人员和紧急医疗服务 (EMS) 领导进行了半结构化定性访谈。我们对半结构化访谈进行了记录、转录,并根据社区参与研究原则,采用综合演绎和归纳主题分析方法对访谈内容进行了编码。我们收集数据,直到达到饱和为止。数据收集和分析参考了实施研究综合框架。两名调查人员独立编码,直到达成 100% 的共识:我们的专题分析揭示了在第一响应者系统中采用这些循证临床干预措施的若干促进因素(即变革的张力、相对优势和兼容性)和障碍(即有限的适应性、缺乏证据强度和质量以及过高的成本)。尽管资金被认为是一个障碍,但分发留用纳洛酮得到了广泛支持。许多人认为,基于现场的丁丙诺啡治疗可以更有效地应对用药过量管理,但也有很多人担心这种干预措施可能与快速护理模式背道而驰。最后,参与者担心由急救人员进行 HIV 和 HCV 检测并不合适,但建议由流动综合医疗人员提供这项服务:这些结果为当地紧急医疗服务战略规划提供了信息,并将为华盛顿州金县流程改进的推广提供参考。未来的工作应评估这些干预措施对用药过量幸存者健康的影响。
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