Screening for problematic opioid use in the emergency department: Comparison of two screening measures

Author:

Punches Brittany E.12ORCID,Freiermuth Caroline E.3,Sprague Jon E.4,Brown Jennifer L.5,Hutzel‐Dunham Elizabeth6,Lambert Joshua6,Braun Robert3,Littlefield Andrew7,Frey Jennifer A.2,Bachmann Daniel J.2,Bischof Jason J.2,Pantalon Michael V.8,Ancona Rachel M.9,Kisor David F.10,Lyons Michael S.2

Affiliation:

1. College of Nursing The Ohio State University Columbus Ohio USA

2. Department of Emergency Medicine The Ohio State University College of Medicine Columbus Ohio USA

3. Department of Emergency Medicine University of Cincinnati College of Medicine Cincinnati Ohio USA

4. The Ohio Attorney General's Center for the Future of Forensic Science Bowling Green State University Bowling Green Ohio USA

5. Department of Psychological Sciences Purdue University West Lafayette Indiana USA

6. College of Nursing University of Cincinnati Cincinnati Ohio USA

7. Department of Psychological Sciences Texas Tech University Lubbock Texas USA

8. Department of Emergency Medicine Yale University School of Medicine New Haven Connecticut USA

9. Department of Emergency Medicine Washington University School of Medicine St. Louis Missouri USA

10. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Pharmacogenomics College of Pharmacy Natural and Health Sciences Manchester University Fort Wayne Indiana USA

Abstract

AbstractStudy objectiveEarlier intervention for opioid use disorder (OUD) may reduce long‐term health implications. Emergency departments (EDs) in the United States treat millions with OUD annually who may not seek care elsewhere. Our objectives were (1) to compare two screening measures for OUD characterization in the ED and (2) to determine the proportion of ED patients screening positive for OUD and those who endorse other substance use to guide future screening programs.MethodsA cross‐sectional study of randomly selected adult patients presenting to three Midwestern US EDs were enrolled, with duplicate patients excluded. Surveys were administered via research assistant and documented on tablet devices. Demographics were self‐reported, and OUD positivity was assessed by the DSM 5 checklist and the WHO ASSIST 3.1. The primary outcome was the concordance between two screening measures for OUD. Our secondary outcome was the proportion of ED patients meeting OUD criteria and endorsed co‐occurring substance use disorder (SUD) criteria.ResultsWe enrolled 1305 participants; median age of participants was 46 years (range 18–84), with 639 (49.0%) Non‐Hispanic, White, and 693 (53.1%) female. Current OUD positivity was identified in 17% (222 out of 1305) of the participants via either DSM‐5 (two or more criteria) or ASSIST (score of 4 or greater). We found moderate agreement between the measures (kappa = 0.56; Phi coefficient = 0.57). Of individuals screening positive for OUD, 182 (82%) endorsed criteria for co‐occurring SUD.ConclusionsOUD is remarkably prevalent in ED populations, with one in six ED patients screening positive. We found a high prevalence of persons identified with OUD and co‐occurring SUD, with moderate agreement between measures. Developing and implementing clinically feasible OUD screening in the ED is essential to enable intervention.

Funder

National Institute on Drug Abuse

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3