IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0186833.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is systematic training in opioid overdose prevention effective?

Author

Listed:
  • Albert Espelt
  • Marina Bosque-Prous
  • Cinta Folch
  • Ana Sarasa-Renedo
  • Xavier Majó
  • Jordi Casabona
  • M Teresa Brugal
  • REDAN Group

Abstract

The objectives were to analyze the knowledge about overdose prevention, the use of naloxone, and the number of fatal overdoses after the implementation of Systematic Training in Overdose Prevention (STOOP) program. We conducted a quasi-experimental study, and held face-to-face interviews before (n = 725) and after (n = 722) implementation of systematic training in two different samples of people who injected opioids attending harm reduction centers. We asked participants to list the main causes of overdose and the main actions that should be taken when witnessing an overdose. We created two dependent variables, the number of (a) correct and (b) incorrect answers. The main independent variable was Study Group: Intervention Group (IG), Comparison Group (CG), Pre-Intervention Group With Sporadic Training in Overdose Prevention (PREIGS), or Pre-Intervention Group Without Training in Overdose Prevention (PREIGW). The relationship between the dependent and independent variables was assessed using a multivariate Poisson regression analysis. Finally, we conducted an interrupted time series analysis of monthly fatal overdoses before and after the implementation of systematic program during the period 2006–2015. Knowledge of overdose prevention increased after implementing systematic training program. Compared to the PREIGW, the IG gave more correct answers (IRR = 1.40;95%CI:1.33–1.47), and fewer incorrect answers (IRR = 0.33;95%CI:0.25–0.44). Forty percent of people who injected opioids who received a naloxone kit had used the kit in response to an overdose they witnessed. These courses increase knowledge of overdose prevention in people who use opioids, give them the necessary skills to use naloxone, and slightly diminish the number of fatal opioid overdoses in the city of Barcelona.

Suggested Citation

  • Albert Espelt & Marina Bosque-Prous & Cinta Folch & Ana Sarasa-Renedo & Xavier Majó & Jordi Casabona & M Teresa Brugal & REDAN Group, 2017. "Is systematic training in opioid overdose prevention effective?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0186833
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186833
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0186833
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0186833&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0186833?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hilbe,Joseph M., 2014. "Modeling Count Data," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107611252, Enero.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luiz Paulo Fávero & Joseph F. Hair & Rafael de Freitas Souza & Matheus Albergaria & Talles V. Brugni, 2021. "Zero-Inflated Generalized Linear Mixed Models: A Better Way to Understand Data Relationships," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-28, May.
    2. Wu, Jiang & Ou, Guiyan & Liu, Xiaohui & Dong, Ke, 2022. "How does academic education background affect top researchers’ performance? Evidence from the field of artificial intelligence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    3. Lutz Bornmann & Robin Haunschild & Rüdiger Mutz, 2021. "Growth rates of modern science: a latent piecewise growth curve approach to model publication numbers from established and new literature databases," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Solymosi, Reka & Petcu, Oana & Wilkinson, Jack, 2020. "Exploring public engagement with missing person appeals on Twitter," SocArXiv wugxs, Center for Open Science.
    5. Moritz Berger & Gerhard Tutz, 2021. "Transition models for count data: a flexible alternative to fixed distribution models," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 30(4), pages 1259-1283, October.
    6. Maurits J. Meijers & Harmen van der Veer, 2019. "MEP Responses to Democratic Backsliding in Hungary and Poland. An Analysis of Agenda‐Setting and Voting Behaviour," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 838-856, July.
    7. de Rezende, Rafael & Egert, Katharina & Marin, Ignacio & Thompson, Guilherme, 2022. "A white-boxed ISSM approach to estimate uncertainty distributions of Walmart sales," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1460-1467.
    8. Andries, Petra & Hünermund, Paul, 2020. "Firm-level effects of staged investments in innovation: The moderating role of resource availability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    9. Yves Arrighi & David Crainich & Véronique Flambard & Sophie Massin, 2022. "Personalized information and willingness to pay for non-financial risk prevention: An experiment," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 57-82, August.
    10. Lin, Jun-You, 2017. "Balancing industry collaboration and academic innovation: The contingent role of collaboration-specific attributes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 216-228.
    11. Jae Teuk Chin, 2020. "Location Choice of New Business Establishments: Understanding the Local Context and Neighborhood Conditions in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    12. Di Novi, Cinzia & Leporatti, Lucia & Levaggi, Rosella & Montefiori, Marcello, 2022. "Adherence during COVID-19: The role of aging and socio-economics status in shaping drug utilization," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 1-14.
    13. Hu, Feng & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A. & Huizingh, Eelko K.R.E., 2020. "The impact of innovation contest briefs on the quality of solvers and solutions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    14. Sinclair, Michael & Ghermandi, Andrea & Signorello, Giovanni & Giuffrida, Laura & De Salvo, Maria, 2022. "Valuing Recreation in Italy's Protected Areas Using Spatial Big Data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    15. Kimberly F. Sellers & Ali Arab & Sean Melville & Fanyu Cui, 2021. "A flexible univariate moving average time-series model for dispersed count data," Journal of Statistical Distributions and Applications, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Hilbe, Joseph M., 2015. "The New Statistics with R: An Introduction for Biologists," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 68(b01).
    17. Simon Kleinert & Christine Volkmann & Marc Grünhagen, 2020. "Third-party signals in equity crowdfunding: the role of prior financing," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 341-365, January.
    18. Corona Francisco & Horrillo Juan de Dios Tena & Wiper Michael Peter, 2017. "On the importance of the probabilistic model in identifying the most decisive games in a tournament," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 13(1), pages 11-23, March.
    19. Brian Fogarty & David Kimball & Lea Kosnik, 2016. "The Media, Voter Fraud, and the 2012 Elections," Working Papers 1012, University of Missouri-St. Louis, Department of Economics.
    20. Molnár, D. László & Hollósné Marosi, Judit, 2015. "Az öregségi nyugdíjasok halandósága. A nyugellátási összeg, a nyugdíjazási életkor és a halandóság összefüggései Magyarországon, 2004-2012 [Mortality of old-age pensioners. Association among the am," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1258-1290.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0186833. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.