Journal of addiction medicine · 2023
Survey of Buprenorphine Low-dose Regimens Used by Healthcare Institutions.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hardy Monika, Grable Samantha, Otley Rachel, Pershing Michelle
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine microdosing ("low-dosing") allows for initiation of buprenorphine without requiring patients to endure withdrawal. Case studies suggest its favorable utility as an alternative to conventional buprenorphine induction. However, published regimens vary in duration, dosage forms used, and timing of full opioid agonist discontinuation.
METHODS: This cross-sectional survey study sought to determine how buprenorphine low-dosing is approached by medical institutions across the United States. The primary end point was characterization of inpatient buprenorphine low-dosing regimens. Situations and types of patients in which low-dosing is used and obstacles to institutional protocol development were also collected. An online survey was disseminated through professional pharmacy organizations and personal contacts. Responses were collected over 4 weeks.
RESULTS: Twenty-three unique protocols were collected from 25 institutions. Most protocols used buccal (8 protocols) or transdermal (8 protocols) buprenorphine as first doses before transitioning to sublingual buprenorphine. The most common starting doses were buprenorphine 20 μg/h transdermal, 150 μg buccal, and 0.5 mg sublingual. Patients unable to tolerate conventional buprenorphine induction or those who potentially used fentanyl nonmedically were most likely to be prescribed low-dosing. The most common obstacle to developing an internal low-dosing protocol was lack of existing consensus guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS: Similar to published regimens, internal protocols are variable. Buccal first doses may be used more commonly in practice based on survey results, while transdermal first doses are more commonly reported in publications. More research is needed to determine whether differences in starting formulations impact safety and efficacy of buprenorphine low-dosing in the inpatient setting.
METHODS: This cross-sectional survey study sought to determine how buprenorphine low-dosing is approached by medical institutions across the United States. The primary end point was characterization of inpatient buprenorphine low-dosing regimens. Situations and types of patients in which low-dosing is used and obstacles to institutional protocol development were also collected. An online survey was disseminated through professional pharmacy organizations and personal contacts. Responses were collected over 4 weeks.
RESULTS: Twenty-three unique protocols were collected from 25 institutions. Most protocols used buccal (8 protocols) or transdermal (8 protocols) buprenorphine as first doses before transitioning to sublingual buprenorphine. The most common starting doses were buprenorphine 20 μg/h transdermal, 150 μg buccal, and 0.5 mg sublingual. Patients unable to tolerate conventional buprenorphine induction or those who potentially used fentanyl nonmedically were most likely to be prescribed low-dosing. The most common obstacle to developing an internal low-dosing protocol was lack of existing consensus guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS: Similar to published regimens, internal protocols are variable. Buccal first doses may be used more commonly in practice based on survey results, while transdermal first doses are more commonly reported in publications. More research is needed to determine whether differences in starting formulations impact safety and efficacy of buprenorphine low-dosing in the inpatient setting.