Application of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to Inform Understanding of Barriers & Facilitators to the Implementation of Opioid and Naloxone Training on College Campuses

Abstract

Abstract Background: The opioid epidemic in the United States continues to worsen. Opioid-only and polysubstance-involved opioid overdose deaths are increasing among adolescents and young adults, who have limited knowledge of opioid overdose prevention, including recognition and response. College campuses have infrastructure to support national-level implementation of evidence-based public health strategies for providing opioid overdose prevention and naloxone training programs among this priority population. However, college campuses are an underutilized, understudied setting for this programming. To address this gap, we conducted research assessing barriers and facilitators to planning and implementing this programming on college campuses. Methods: We held 9 focus groups among purposively selected campus stakeholders whose perceptions were important to understand in planning for the dissemination and implementation of opioid overdose prevention and naloxone training. Focus group scripts were informed by The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to query about perceptions of opioid and other substance use, opioid and other substance use-related resources, and naloxone administration training. We used a deductive-inductive, iterative approach to thematic analysis. Results: Themes about implementation barriers included: 1) the perception that problematic use of other (non-opioid) substances was more prevalent than opioid use on campus and focus on those substances would be a greater priority on college campuses; 2) student schedules were overwhelmed with academic commitments and extracurricular activities, making delivery of additional training challenging; 3) barriers related to the perceived complexity and decentralization of communication on campus, preventing students from knowing how to access substance use-related resources. Themes about implementation facilitators included: 1) framing naloxone training as important in becoming a responsible leader on campus and in the broader community; 2) leveraging existing infrastructure, champions within existing campus groups, and tailored messaging to facilitate participation in naloxone training. Conclusions: This is the first study to provide in-depth insights into potential barriers and facilitators to widespread, routine implementation of naloxone/opioid education on undergraduate college campuses. The study captured diverse stakeholder perspectives and was theoretically grounded in CFIR, contributing to the growing literature on the application and refinement of CFIR across diverse community and school contexts.