494 - Pilot for Healthcare Worker Training on Adolescent Opioid Use Disorder

Publication Number: 494.6143

Thomas J. Agostini, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States; Adriana Herrera, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States; Kira Gressman, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States; Janis L. Sethness, Seattle Children's, Seattle, WA, United States; Kym Ahrens, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, United States; Chris Buresh, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA, United States

Background: Opioid overdose deaths (OOD) for adolescents are now a leading cause of death in the US, and survey studies indicate that pediatric providers do not feel prepared to treat opioid use disorder (OUD). Training the pediatric workforce to treat OUD and provide overdose prevention counseling is paramount to combating this crisis.

Objective: This study aims to assess the efficacy of an educational intervention for pediatric healthcare workers (PHCWs) on adolescent opioid use.

Design/Methods: PHCWs including residents, attendings, nurses, and medical students all participated in the intervention. Sessions were incorporated into resident didactics and as standalone events open to all clinical staff in the organization. Topics for didactics included an overview on adolescent opioid use and buprenorphine induction in adolescents. Didactics were followed by a panel session led by people who use drugs (PWUD) talking about discrimination they had experienced from healthcare providers, which was funded through a NIDA–SAEMF award to compensate the panelists with lived experience. Pre- and post-session surveys were used to compare differences in knowledge and patient counseling on OUD. This study received IRB exempt status through the University of Washington (STUDY00020084).

Results: 46 PHCWs participated in the overview on adolescent opioid use, 14 on buprenorphine induction in adolescents, and 17 for the session on discrimination against PWUD. Participants reported increased comfort teaching patients how to recognize an overdose (3.64±0.96, 4.52±0.74, p< 0.001) and teaching patients how to administer naloxone (2.98±1.09, 4.17±0.73, p=0.004). Participating prescribers and students had increased comfort discussing buprenorphine with patients (3.07±0.92, 4.57±0.52, p< 0.001) and prescribing buprenorphine (2.43±0.98, 4.29±0.95, p=0.015). On average, participants had a higher number of correct responses to case-based questions following the intervention (3.62±1.26, 4.62±0.51, p=0.008). There were significant differences in beliefs that opioid use disorder is a chronic medical condition (4.31±0.60, 4.97±0.25, p< 0.001), that participants would be comfortable having a person with OUD as a neighbor (3.75±0.68, 4.13±0.50, p=0.01) or marry into the family (3.44±0.81, 3.81± 0.75, p=0.03).

Conclusion(s): This intervention increased participant clinical knowledge and self-reported comfort related to adolescent opioid use counseling. Given the growing need for PHCWs to have adequate knowledge on the subject, the intervention used at this program may serve as a reproducible model.

Overview on Adolescent Opioid Use
Image 10-15-24 at 12.18 PM.jpegPaired Responses (n = 42) before and after the overview on adolescent opioid use. Comfort with certain topics were rated on a 5-point Likert scale from “Extremely Uncomfortable” to “Extremely Comfortable.” Responses were converted to numeric values from 1 to 5, averaged across the cohort, and paired two-sided t-tests were performed and p values are reported above.

Buprenorphine Induction in Adolescents
Paired Responses (n = 14) before and after the session on buprenorphine induction. Responses from medical students and providers only were included in analysis. Comfort with certain topics were rated on a 5-point Likert scale from “Extremely Uncomfortable” to “Extremely Comfortable.” Responses were converted to numeric values from 1 to 5, averaged across the cohort, and paired two-sided t-tests were performed and p values are reported above.

Bias questions about PWUD
Paired Responses (n = 17) before and after the panel led by PWUD. Answers were rated on a 5-point Likert scale and converted to numeric values from 1 to 5, averaged across the cohort, and were reported above as mean values. Paired two-sided t-tests were performed and p values are reported above.

Overview on Adolescent Opioid Use
Image 10-15-24 at 12.18 PM.jpegPaired Responses (n = 42) before and after the overview on adolescent opioid use. Comfort with certain topics were rated on a 5-point Likert scale from “Extremely Uncomfortable” to “Extremely Comfortable.” Responses were converted to numeric values from 1 to 5, averaged across the cohort, and paired two-sided t-tests were performed and p values are reported above.

Buprenorphine Induction in Adolescents
Paired Responses (n = 14) before and after the session on buprenorphine induction. Responses from medical students and providers only were included in analysis. Comfort with certain topics were rated on a 5-point Likert scale from “Extremely Uncomfortable” to “Extremely Comfortable.” Responses were converted to numeric values from 1 to 5, averaged across the cohort, and paired two-sided t-tests were performed and p values are reported above.

Bias questions about PWUD
Paired Responses (n = 17) before and after the panel led by PWUD. Answers were rated on a 5-point Likert scale and converted to numeric values from 1 to 5, averaged across the cohort, and were reported above as mean values. Paired two-sided t-tests were performed and p values are reported above.