Background: Substance use is prevalent in Canada, yet treatment is inaccessible. The Rapid Access to Addiction Medicine (RAAM) clinic opened at the University Health Network (UHN) in January 2018 as part of a larger network of addictions clinics in Toronto, Ontario, to enable timely, low barrier access to medical treatment for substance use disorder (SUD). Patients attend on a walk-in basis without requiring an appointment or referral. We describe the RAAM clinic model, including referral patterns, patient demographics and substance use patterns. Secondary outcomes include retention in treatment and changes in both self-reported and objective substance use. Methods: The Electronic Medical Record at the clinic was reviewed for the first 26 weeks of the clinic's operation. We identified SUD diagnoses, referral source, medications prescribed, retention in care and self-reported substance use. Results: The clinic saw 64 unique patients: 66% had alcohol use disorder (AUD), 39% had opiate use disorder (OUD) and 20% had stimulant use disorder. Fifty-five percent of patients were referred from primary care providers, 30% from the emergency department and 11% from withdrawal management services. Forty-two percent remained ongoing patients, 23% were discharged to other care and 34% were lost to follow-up. Gabapentin (39%), naltrexone (39%), and acamprosate (15%) were most frequently prescribed for AUD. Patients with AUD reported a significant decrease in alcohol consumption at their most recent visit. Most patients (65%) with OUD were prescribed buprenorphine, and most patients with OUD (65%) had a negative urine screen at their most recent visit. Conclusion: The RAAM model provides low-barrier, accessible outpatient care for patients with substance use disorder and facilitates the prescription of evidence-based pharmacotherapy for AUD and OUD. Patients referred by their primary care physician and the emergency department demonstrated a reduction in median alcohol consumption and high rates of opioid abstinence.

The purpose of this study was to describe the design and evolution of a unique and successful Master of Science program in anatomical sciences at one Canadian post-secondary institution and to evaluate its long-term impact on student learning. This program prepares students to teach anatomy and design curricula in the anatomical sciences and is structured around three pillars of competency-content (disciplinary knowledge and transferable skills), pedagogy, and inquiry. Graduates of the program from the last ten years were surveyed, to better understand the knowledge, skills, and habits of mind they have adopted and implemented since completion. Interest was taken in identifying aspects of the program that students found particularly beneficial and areas that needed to be further developed. Based on the findings, this program has been a highly valuable experience for the graduates especially in helping them develop transferable skills, and grow as individuals. The hope is that other institutions that have similar programs in place or are considering developing them would benefit from this description of the program design and the sharing of the lessons learned.

Introduction: The opioid crisis persists, and in the context of this urgency and new practice guidelines, the practice of buprenorphine (BUP) prescription is expanding across Canadian emergency departments (EDs). The objective of this study was to identify current knowledge, attitudes and behaviours to managing opioid use disorder (OUD) in the ED, including barriers and facilitators to prescribing BUP. Methods: Forty ED staff physicians were randomly invited to participate from an urban Toronto ED which recently received continuing medical education in addictions, and whose hospital established an addictions follow-up clinic. Individual semi-structured interviews with the 19 physicians who self-selected to participate were grounded in phenomenology, allowing for in-depth accounts of participants’ lived experience and viewpoints on their role in addressing OUD. Thematic analysis was achieved through multiple readings; themes were coded using Dedoose software by two researchers. Themes were further organized as facilitators, barriers, and proposed solutions. Results: Opioid withdrawal management in the ED varied significantly between these practitioners in the same practice group. Facilitators to treating withdrawal and initiating BUP in the ED were rooted in three contributors to physician empowerment: knowledge about OUD and BUP, positive patient and provider experience with substitution therapy in the past, and exposure to physician champions to guide their practice. Systems-level facilitators included timely access to follow-up care and an available order set. Barriers included provider inexperience: missing subtle presentations of withdrawal, lacking feedback on treatment effectiveness, and reported uncertainty about the protocol from nursing staff. The ED environment also limits time to counsel effectively and discourages taking up a bed both to wait for withdrawal onset and for BUP induction. Other barriers were concerns about precipitating withdrawal, prescribing a chronic medication in acute care, and patient attitudes. Conclusion: This is the first study describing barriers and facilitators to addressing OUD and prescribing BUP in the ED. These findings suggest a role for home induction, involvement of allied health professionals in BUP counseling, and heightened continuing medical education. Results will inform departmental efforts across Canada to implement BUP prescribing as standard of care for patients in opioid withdrawal.

Both impulsivity and stress are risk factors for substance abuse, but it is not clear how these two processes interact to alter susceptibility for the disorder. The aim of this project was to examine the pharmacology of a stress-impulsivity interaction in rats. To do so, we tested the effects of yohimbine on impulsive action and then assessed whether behavioural changes could be reduced by antagonists at different receptor subtypes. Male Long-Evans rats were injected with various doses of yohimbine (0-5.0 mg/kg) before testing in the response-inhibition task. In subsequent experiments, yohimbine (2.5 mg/kg) was injected following pretreatment with the following receptor antagonists: corticotropin-releasing factor receptor 1, antalarmin (0-20 mg/kg); glucocorticoid, mifepristone (0-30 mg/kg); noradrenergic (NA) α1, prazosin (0-2 mg/kg); NA α2, guanfacine (0-0.5 mg/kg); NA β2, propranolol (0.5-2.0 mg/kg); dopamine D1/5, SCH 39166 (0-0.0625 mg/kg); μ opioid, naloxone (0-2 mg/kg); or 5-HT2A, M100907 (0.005-0.05 mg/kg). In all experiments, impulsive action was measured as increased premature responding. Yohimbine dose dependently increased impulsive action, but the effect was not reversed by antagonist pretreatment. None of the drugs altered any other behavioural measure. We conclude that stress-impulsivity interactions are likely mediated by a synergy of multiple neurotransmitter systems.

Objective Opioid-related deaths are increasing at alarming rates in Canada, with a 34% increase from 2016 to 2017. Patients with opioid use disorder often visit emergency departments (ED), presenting an opportunity to engage patients in treatment. Buprenorphine-naloxone is first-line treatment for opioid use disorder, but current management in the ED is unknown. This study aimed to characterize opioid use disorder management in the ED. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study of emergency physicians across Canada. A survey was circulated electronically to the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians members. Participants were asked about their current management practices, satisfaction, and helpfulness of resources. SAS (version 9.4) was used for statistical analysis. We dichotomized Likert-scale responses to approximate relative risk ratios via a log binomial analysis. Results The survey was completed by 179 participants for a response rate of 11.1%; 143 (79.9%) physicians treated patients with opioid use disorder more than once a week. Only 7% (n = 13) of respondents always/often gave buprenorphine in the ED. Referral to an addiction clinic where patients were seen quickly was deemed the most helpful (90.5%, n = 162). Physicians who reported satisfaction with opioid use disorder management were four times more likely to prescribe buprenorphine in the ED or as an outpatient script (RR = 4.41, CI = 2.33–8.33, p < 0.01; RR = 4.51, CI = 2.21–9.22, p < 0.01). Conclusion This study found that buprenorphine is not frequently prescribed in the ED setting, which is incongruent with the 2018 guidelines. Care coordination and on-site support were helpful to ED physicians. Hospitals should use knowledge translation strategies to improve the care of patients with an opioid use disorder.

No abstract

Long-term use of opioid analgesics is limited by tolerance development and undesirable adverse effects. Paradoxically, spinal administration of ultra-low-dose (ULD) G-protein-coupled receptor antagonists attenuates analgesic tolerance. Here, we determined whether systemic ULD α2-adrenergic receptor (AR) antagonists attenuate the development of morphine tolerance, whether these effects extend to the cannabinoid (CB1) receptor system, and if behavioral effects are reflected in changes in opioid-induced spinal gliosis. Male rats were treated daily with morphine (5 mg/kg) alone or in combination with ULD α2-AR (atipamezole or efaroxan; 17 ng/kg) or CB1 (rimonabant; 5 ng/kg) antagonists; control groups received ULD injections only. Thermal tail flick latencies were assessed across 7 days, before and 30 min after the injection. On day 8, spinal cords were isolated, and changes in spinal gliosis were assessed through fluorescent immunohistochemistry. Both ULD α2-AR antagonists attenuated morphine tolerance, whereas the ULD CB1 antagonist did not. In contrast, both ULD atipamezole and ULD rimonabant attenuated morphine-induced microglial reactivity and astrogliosis in deep and superficial spinal dorsal horn. So, although paradoxical effects of ULD antagonists are common to several G-protein-coupled receptor systems, these may not involve similar mechanisms. Spinal glia alone may not be the main mechanism through which tolerance is modulated.

Objectives Regional anesthesia has many applications in the emergency department (ED). It has been shown to reduce general anesthetic dose, requirement for post-procedural opioids, and recovery time. We sought to characterize the use of regional anesthesia by Canadian emergency physicians, including practices, perspectives and barriers to use in the ED. Methods A cross-sectional survey was administered to members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP), consisting of sixteen multiple choice and numerical response questions. Responses were summarized descriptively as percentages and as the median and inter quartile range (IQR) for quantitative variables. Results The survey was completed by 149/1144 staff emergency physicians, with a response rate of 13%. Respondents used regional anesthesia a median of 2 (IQR 0–4) times in the past ten shifts. The most broadly used applications were soft tissue repair (84.5% of respondents, n = 126), fracture pain management (79.2%, n = 118) and orthopedic reduction (72.5%, n = 108). Respondents agreed that regional anesthesia is safe to use in the ED (98.7%) and were interested in using it more frequently (78.5%). Almost all (98.0%) respondents had point of care ultrasound available, however less than half (49.0%) felt comfortable using it for RA. Respondents indicated that they required more training (76.5%), a departmental protocol (47.0%), and nursing assistance (30.2%) to increase their use of RA. Conclusion Canadian emergency physicians use regional anesthesia infrequently but express an interest in expanding their use. While equipment is available, additional training, protocols, and increased support from nursing staff are modifiable factors that could facilitate uptake.