Implementation of a post-overdose quick response team in the rural Midwest: A team case study

Abstract

The opioid-involved overdose crisis in the United States has had devastating effects on communities across the country. Post-overdose outreach teams have emerged as one way to reduce overdose risk for individuals who use drugs. Limited literature exists on how these teams are developed and how they operate. Even less is known about these teams in rural locations. This case study explored one rural team’s implementation, including its strengths and barriers to serving participants. Findings from interviews with program staff indicate the team had a consistent procedure for conducting outreach with overdose survivors and family members, had broad support and buy-in from leadership, and were able to clearly articulate the program’s strengths, challenges, and opportunities for growth—including the need for more formal program evaluation. Factors that facilitated implementation included use of a person-centred and non-coercive approach, establishment of team role boundaries, multi-disciplinary collaboration, empathy, and buy-in across agencies and town leadership. Barriers included stigma among citizens, lack of an evaluation plan, difficulty providing outreach to individuals who have unstable housing, and difficulty following up with service agencies. The findings can benefit other jurisdictions, especially small and rural localities seeking to address the drug crisis more effectively.

Prevalence and correlates of using opioids alone among individuals in a residential treatment program in Michigan: implications for overdose mortality prevention

“…Professionals working in settings frequented by people engaging in non-medical use of opioid analgesic medications, such as pharmacies, emergency medical settings, primary care, substance use disorder treatment settings, and pain clinics would further be well-positioned to engage clients in discussions about overdose risk and provide tools like naloxone that reduce harm. Outreach to individuals who recently survived an overdose through community-based mobile response teams offer additional opportunities to deliver harm reduction tools to these individuals and their peer networks as well as connect them with services like substance use treatment [ 57 , 58 ]. Given the recent uptick in fentanyl contamination of illicitly manufactured pills sold as opioid analgesic medications, this is essential now more than ever [ 59 , 60 ].…”

Algorithm for community security risk assessment and influencing factors analysis by back propagation neural network

“…Furthermore, a method was devised for calculating weight coefficients in the absence of certain data. This approach culminated in the determination of a comprehensive risk value for the community [ 10 ]. Acknowledging the heightened population density in communities, Adomah et al (2022) advocated for a multifaceted approach to disaster risk assessment.…”

Post-overdose follow-up in the community with peer recovery specialists: The Lake Superior Diversion and Substance Use Response Team

“…National prevalence of post-overdose follow-up efforts suggests most programs include law enforcement during the follow-up, most often with EMS ( Ray et al, 2023 ). Research on these efforts has been limited primarily to case studies and state-wide surveys with findings that suggests little consistency in the practices, partners, or services provided and largely focused on efforts led by, or that include sworn law enforcement in the follow-up response with little rigorous evaluation of effectiveness ( Canada and Formica, 2022 ; Davoust et al., 2021 ; Donnelly et al., 2022 ; Formica et al., 2018 , 2022 ; Tori et al., 2022 ; Wagner et al., 2016 ). Important concerns have been raised about post-overdose response involving law enforcement, from unintended effects through increased mistrust of social services ( Doe-Simkins et al., 2022 ; Latimore and Bergstein, 2017 ; van der Meulen et al., 2021 ; Wagner et al., 2021 ) to specific activities like “warrant checking,” prior to outreach that might ultimately undermine program goals ( Tori et al., 2022 ).…”