开展用药过量教育培训后,对急救人员对用药过量者和纳洛酮态度的纵向评估。

Sarah Phillips, Zach Budesa, Ryan Smith, Claire A. Wood, R. Winograd
{"title":"开展用药过量教育培训后,对急救人员对用药过量者和纳洛酮态度的纵向评估。","authors":"Sarah Phillips, Zach Budesa, Ryan Smith, Claire A. Wood, R. Winograd","doi":"10.1177/29767342241241401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nIn addition to teaching overdose recognition and response, overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) trainings for emergency responders aim to improve trainee attitudes toward people who use drugs and toward naloxone. This study examines the training effectiveness long term, as well as the extent to which improvements are dependent on profession type or recent experience administering naloxone.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA total of 774 emergency responders, consisting of law enforcement officers (LEOs) (n = 624, 81%) and emergency medical service (EMS) personnel (n = 150, 19%), attended OEND trainings and completed surveys immediately prior to (\"pre\") and following (\"post\") the training, as well as 6 months later (\"follow-up\"). Survey items assessed attitudes toward people who have overdosed, naloxone-related risk compensation (ie, \"enabling\") beliefs, and whether participants had administered naloxone since attending the training. Multiple regression and estimated marginal means were used to evaluate changes in scores.\n\n\nRESULTS\nEmergency responders showed improved attitudes (pre = 2.60, follow-up = 2.45, P < .001) and risk compensation beliefs (pre = 2.97, follow-up = 2.67, P < .001) 6 months following the training. Follow-up scores differed by profession, with LEOs endorsing worse attitudes (difference = 0.55, P = .013) and more risk compensation beliefs (difference = 0.67, P = .014) than EMS. In addition, having recently administered naloxone predicted more negative attitudes (EMS: difference = 0.55, P = .01; LEO: difference = 0.54, P = .004) and risk compensation beliefs (EMS = 0.73, P = .006; LEO = 0.69, P = .002) at follow-up.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nSix months after an OEND training, emergency responders' attitudes toward people who overdose, and their risk compensation beliefs remained improved. However, LEOs had more negative follow-up attitudes and beliefs compared to EMS. Emergency responders who had administered naloxone had worse attitudes and beliefs at follow-up than those who had not. Of note, our sample evidenced sizable attrition between pre and follow-up assessments, leaving room for selection bias. Future studies should investigate how to mitigate negative effects of administering naloxone on attitudes toward those who overdose, and belief that naloxone is \"enabling.\"","PeriodicalId":516535,"journal":{"name":"Substance use & addiction journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"29767342241241401"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Longitudinal Assessment of Emergency Responders' Attitudes Toward People Who Overdose and Naloxone Following an Overdose Education Training.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Phillips, Zach Budesa, Ryan Smith, Claire A. Wood, R. Winograd\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/29767342241241401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\nIn addition to teaching overdose recognition and response, overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) trainings for emergency responders aim to improve trainee attitudes toward people who use drugs and toward naloxone. This study examines the training effectiveness long term, as well as the extent to which improvements are dependent on profession type or recent experience administering naloxone.\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nA total of 774 emergency responders, consisting of law enforcement officers (LEOs) (n = 624, 81%) and emergency medical service (EMS) personnel (n = 150, 19%), attended OEND trainings and completed surveys immediately prior to (\\\"pre\\\") and following (\\\"post\\\") the training, as well as 6 months later (\\\"follow-up\\\"). Survey items assessed attitudes toward people who have overdosed, naloxone-related risk compensation (ie, \\\"enabling\\\") beliefs, and whether participants had administered naloxone since attending the training. Multiple regression and estimated marginal means were used to evaluate changes in scores.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nEmergency responders showed improved attitudes (pre = 2.60, follow-up = 2.45, P < .001) and risk compensation beliefs (pre = 2.97, follow-up = 2.67, P < .001) 6 months following the training. Follow-up scores differed by profession, with LEOs endorsing worse attitudes (difference = 0.55, P = .013) and more risk compensation beliefs (difference = 0.67, P = .014) than EMS. In addition, having recently administered naloxone predicted more negative attitudes (EMS: difference = 0.55, P = .01; LEO: difference = 0.54, P = .004) and risk compensation beliefs (EMS = 0.73, P = .006; LEO = 0.69, P = .002) at follow-up.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSION\\nSix months after an OEND training, emergency responders' attitudes toward people who overdose, and their risk compensation beliefs remained improved. However, LEOs had more negative follow-up attitudes and beliefs compared to EMS. Emergency responders who had administered naloxone had worse attitudes and beliefs at follow-up than those who had not. Of note, our sample evidenced sizable attrition between pre and follow-up assessments, leaving room for selection bias. Future studies should investigate how to mitigate negative effects of administering naloxone on attitudes toward those who overdose, and belief that naloxone is \\\"enabling.\\\"\",\"PeriodicalId\":516535,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Substance use & addiction journal\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"29767342241241401\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Substance use & addiction journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/29767342241241401\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Substance use & addiction journal","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/29767342241241401","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景针对紧急救援人员的用药过量教育和纳洛酮发放(OEND)培训除了教授用药过量识别和应对方法外,还旨在改善受训人员对吸毒者和纳洛酮的态度。本研究探讨了培训的长期有效性,以及培训效果的改善在多大程度上取决于职业类型或最近使用纳洛酮的经验。方法共有 774 名应急响应人员参加了 OEND 培训,并在培训前("培训前")、培训后("培训后")以及 6 个月后("随访")填写了调查问卷,其中包括执法人员(LEOs)(n = 624,81%)和紧急医疗服务(EMS)人员(n = 150,19%)。调查项目包括对吸毒过量者的态度、与纳洛酮相关的风险补偿(即 "使能")信念,以及参与者在参加培训后是否施用过纳洛酮。结果参加培训 6 个月后,应急响应人员的态度(培训前 = 2.60,培训后 = 2.45,P < .001)和风险补偿信念(培训前 = 2.97,培训后 = 2.67,P < .001)均有所改善。不同职业的后续得分也不同,与急救医疗人员相比,执法人员的态度更差(差异 = 0.55,P = .013),风险补偿信念更强(差异 = 0.67,P = .014)。此外,最近施用过纳洛酮也预示着随访时更消极的态度(EMS:差异 = 0.55,P = .01;LEO:差异 = 0.54,P = .004)和风险补偿信念(EMS = 0.73,P = .006;LEO = 0.69,P = .002)。然而,与急救医疗人员相比,地方急救人员在后续态度和信念方面更为消极。施用过纳洛酮的急救人员与未施用过纳洛酮的急救人员相比,在随访中态度和信念更差。值得注意的是,我们的样本在预评估和随访评估之间有相当大的自然减员,这就为选择偏差留下了空间。未来的研究应探讨如何减轻施用纳洛酮对用药过量者的态度以及纳洛酮 "有利 "信念的负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Longitudinal Assessment of Emergency Responders' Attitudes Toward People Who Overdose and Naloxone Following an Overdose Education Training.
BACKGROUND In addition to teaching overdose recognition and response, overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) trainings for emergency responders aim to improve trainee attitudes toward people who use drugs and toward naloxone. This study examines the training effectiveness long term, as well as the extent to which improvements are dependent on profession type or recent experience administering naloxone. METHODS A total of 774 emergency responders, consisting of law enforcement officers (LEOs) (n = 624, 81%) and emergency medical service (EMS) personnel (n = 150, 19%), attended OEND trainings and completed surveys immediately prior to ("pre") and following ("post") the training, as well as 6 months later ("follow-up"). Survey items assessed attitudes toward people who have overdosed, naloxone-related risk compensation (ie, "enabling") beliefs, and whether participants had administered naloxone since attending the training. Multiple regression and estimated marginal means were used to evaluate changes in scores. RESULTS Emergency responders showed improved attitudes (pre = 2.60, follow-up = 2.45, P < .001) and risk compensation beliefs (pre = 2.97, follow-up = 2.67, P < .001) 6 months following the training. Follow-up scores differed by profession, with LEOs endorsing worse attitudes (difference = 0.55, P = .013) and more risk compensation beliefs (difference = 0.67, P = .014) than EMS. In addition, having recently administered naloxone predicted more negative attitudes (EMS: difference = 0.55, P = .01; LEO: difference = 0.54, P = .004) and risk compensation beliefs (EMS = 0.73, P = .006; LEO = 0.69, P = .002) at follow-up. CONCLUSION Six months after an OEND training, emergency responders' attitudes toward people who overdose, and their risk compensation beliefs remained improved. However, LEOs had more negative follow-up attitudes and beliefs compared to EMS. Emergency responders who had administered naloxone had worse attitudes and beliefs at follow-up than those who had not. Of note, our sample evidenced sizable attrition between pre and follow-up assessments, leaving room for selection bias. Future studies should investigate how to mitigate negative effects of administering naloxone on attitudes toward those who overdose, and belief that naloxone is "enabling."
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信