Suppr超能文献

带离型纳洛酮在多中心急救环境中的应用:TIME 可行性集群 RCT。

Take-home naloxone in multicentre emergency settings: the TIME feasibility cluster RCT.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.

University of the West of England, Bristol, UK.

出版信息

Health Technol Assess. 2024 Oct;28(74):1-69. doi: 10.3310/YNRC8249.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Opioids kill more people than any other drug. Naloxone is an opioid antagonist which can be distributed in take-home 'kits' for peer administration (take-home naloxone).

AIM

To determine the feasibility of carrying out a definitive randomised controlled trial of take-home naloxone in emergency settings.

DESIGN

We used Welsh routine data (2015-21) to test the feasibility of developing a discriminant function to identify people at high risk of fatal opioid overdose. We carried out a cluster randomised controlled trial and qualitative study to examine experiences of service users and providers. We assessed feasibility of intervention and trial methods against predetermined progression criteria related to: site sign-up, staff trained, identification of eligible patients, proportion given kits, identification of people who died of opioid poisoning, data linkage and retrieval of outcomes.

SETTING

This study was carried out in the emergency environment; sites comprised an emergency department and associated ambulance service catchment area.

PARTICIPANTS

At intervention sites, we invited emergency department clinicians and paramedics to participate. We recruited adult patients who arrived at the emergency department or were attended to by ambulance paramedics for a problem related to opioid use with capacity to consent to receiving the take-home naloxone and related training.

INTERVENTIONS

Usual care comprised basic life support plus naloxone by paramedics or emergency department staff. The take-home naloxone intervention was offered in addition to usual care, with guidance for recipients on basic life support, the importance of calling the emergency services, duration of effect, safety and legality of naloxone administration.

DISCRIMINANT FUNCTION

With low numbers of opioid-related deaths (1105/3,227,396) and a high proportion having no contact with health services in the year before death, the predictive link between death and opioid-related healthcare events was weak. Logistic regression models indicated we would need to monitor one-third of the population to capture 75% of the decedents from opioid overdose in 1-year follow-up.

RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Four sites participated in the trial and 299 of 687 (44%) eligible clinical staff were trained. Sixty take-home naloxone kits were supplied to patients during 1-year recruitment. Eligible patients were not offered take-home naloxone kits 164 times: 'forgot' ( = 136); 'too busy' ( = 15); suspected intentional overdose ( = 3).

QUALITATIVE INTERVIEWS

Service users had high levels of knowledge about take-home naloxone. They were supportive of the intervention but noted concerns about opioid withdrawal and resistance to attending hospital for an overdose. Service providers were positive about the intervention but reported barriers including difficulty with consenting and training high-risk opioid users.

HEALTH ECONOMICS

We were able to calculate costs to train staff at three sites (£40 per AS and £17 in Site 1 ED). No adverse events were reported. Progression criteria were not met - fewer than 50% of eligible staff were trained, fewer than 50% of eligible patients received the intervention and outcomes were not retrieved within reasonable timescales.

FUTURE WORK

The take-home naloxone intervention needs to be developed and evaluated in emergency care settings, with appropriate methods.

LIMITATIONS

The Take-home naloxone Intervention Multicentre Emergency setting study was interrupted by coronavirus disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not meet progression criteria for intervention or trial methods feasibility, so outcomes were not followed up and a fully powered trial is not planned.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN13232859.

FUNDING

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/91/04) and is published in full in ; Vol. 28, No. 74. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

摘要

背景

阿片类药物导致的死亡人数超过其他任何药物。纳洛酮是一种阿片类拮抗剂,可以分发给同行进行家庭管理(家庭纳洛酮)。

目的

确定在急诊环境中开展家庭纳洛酮随机对照试验的可行性。

设计

我们使用威尔士常规数据(2015-21 年)来测试开发一种鉴别函数以识别高风险致命阿片类药物过量的可能性。我们进行了一项集群随机对照试验和定性研究,以检查服务使用者和提供者的经验。我们根据与以下方面相关的预定进展标准评估干预措施和试验方法的可行性:地点注册、接受培训的工作人员、确定合格患者、发放试剂盒的比例、确定死于阿片类药物中毒的人数、数据链接和结果检索。

地点

这项研究在急诊环境中进行;地点包括急诊室和相关的救护车服务的收容区。

参与者

在干预地点,我们邀请急诊室医生和护理人员参与。我们招募了因与阿片类药物使用相关的问题而到达急诊室或被救护车护理人员救治的成年患者,他们有能力同意接受家庭纳洛酮和相关培训。

干预措施

常规护理包括基本生命支持加护理人员或急诊室工作人员的纳洛酮。除了常规护理外,还提供家庭纳洛酮干预,向接受者提供有关基本生命支持、拨打紧急服务电话的重要性、效果持续时间、纳洛酮管理的安全性和合法性的指导。

鉴别函数

由于阿片类药物相关死亡人数较少(1105/3227396),且大部分在死亡前一年没有与医疗服务机构接触,因此死亡与阿片类药物相关医疗事件之间的预测联系较弱。逻辑回归模型表明,我们需要监测三分之一的人口,才能在 1 年的随访中捕获 75%的阿片类药物过量死亡者。

随机对照试验

四个地点参与了试验,687 名符合条件的临床工作人员中有 299 名(44%)接受了培训。在 1 年的招募期间,向 60 名患者提供了家庭纳洛酮试剂盒。有 164 次没有向符合条件的患者提供家庭纳洛酮试剂盒:“忘记”(136 次);“太忙”(15 次);怀疑故意过量(3 次)。

定性访谈

服务使用者对家庭纳洛酮有很高的了解程度。他们支持这项干预措施,但对阿片类药物戒断和对因过量而不愿去医院的担忧表示关注。服务提供者对干预措施持积极态度,但报告了一些障碍,包括同意和培训高危阿片类药物使用者的困难。

卫生经济学

我们能够计算在三个地点培训工作人员的成本(AS 每人 40 英镑,Site 1 ED 每人 17 英镑)。没有报告不良事件。没有达到进展标准-不到 50%的合格工作人员接受了培训,不到 50%的合格患者接受了干预,并且在合理的时间内没有检索到结果。

未来工作

家庭纳洛酮干预措施需要在急诊环境中进行开发和评估,采用适当的方法。

局限性

由于冠状病毒病,家庭纳洛酮干预多中心急诊设置研究被中断。

结论

本研究未达到干预或试验方法可行性的进展标准,因此未随访结果,也未计划进行完全有效的试验。

试验注册

本试验在 ISRCTN 注册,注册号为 ISRCTN13232859。

资金

本研究由英国国家卫生与保健优化研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估计划资助(NIHR 资助号:16/91/04),全文发表于 2023 年第 28 卷第 74 期。欲了解更多有关该资助的信息,请访问 NIHR 资助和奖项网站。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验