Background People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are high-risk for short-term mortality and morbidity. Emergency department (ED) interventions can reduce those risks, but benefits wane without ongoing community follow-up. Objective To evaluate an ED-based intensive community outreach program. Methods At two urban EDs between October 2019 and March 2020, we enrolled patients with OUD not currently on opioid agonist therapy (OAT) in a prospective cohort study evaluating a one-year intensive community outreach program, which provided ongoing addictions care, housing resources, and community support. We surveyed patients at intake and at scheduled outreach encounters at one, two, six, and twelve months. Follow-up surveys assessed OAT uptake, addictions care engagement, housing status, quality of life scores, illicit opioid use, and outreach helpfulness. We used descriptive statistics for each period and conducted sensitivity and subgroup analyses to account for missing data. Results Of 84 baseline participants, 29% were female and 32% were housed, with a median age of 33. Sixty participants (71%) completed at least one follow-up survey. Survey completion rates were 37%, 38%, 39%, and 40% respectively at one, two, six, and twelve months. Participants had a median of three outreach encounters. Among respondents, OAT was 0% at enrolment and ranged from 38% to 56% at follow-up; addictions care engagement was 22% at enrolment and ranged from 65% to 81% during follow-up; and housing was 40% at enrolment and ranged from 48% to 59% during follow-up. Improvements from baseline to follow-up occurred for all time periods. OAT and engagement in care benefits were maintained in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Respondents rated the outreach program as helpful at all time periods, Conclusion An ED-initiated intensive outreach program for patients with OUD not yet on OAT was associated with a persistent increase in OAT use and engagement in care, as well as housing.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, youth have experienced substantial stress due to abrupt changes in education, finances, and social life, compounding pre-existing stressors. With youth (ages 15-26) often at critical points in development, they are vulnerable to long-term mental health challenges brought on by pandemic trauma. To identify youth experiences throughout the pandemic and examine changes over time, we conducted semi-structured interviews among n=141 youth in two Canadian provinces (Ontario and British Columbia) and across the country of Ireland at three time points over the course of more than one year (August 2020-October 2021). We conducted a qualitative longitudinal analysis using an inductive content approach. Categories identified were (1) coping with hardship; (2) opportunities for growth; (3) adapting to new ways of accessing services; (4) mixed views on the pandemic: attitudes, behaviour, and perception of policy response; (5) navigating COVID-19 information; (6) transitioning to life after the pandemic; and (7) youth-led recommendations for government and service response. The findings also reveal trends in health and wellness in accordance with prolonged periods of lockdown, changes in weather, and return to normalcy after the availability of COVID-19 vaccines. Key recommendations from youth include incorporating youth voice into decision making, communicating public health information effectively to youth, enhancing service delivery post-pandemic, and planning for future pandemics. These results provide insights into the extensive longitudinal impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on young people across three geographical locations. Including youth in decision making for future pandemics or public health emergencies is critical.

Objectives Many emergency department (ED) patients with opioid use disorder are candidates for home buprenorphine/naloxone initiation with to-go packs. We studied patient opinions and acceptance of buprenorphine/naloxone to-go packs, and factors associated with their acceptance. Methods We identified patients at two urban EDs in British Columbia who met opioid use disorder criteria, were not presently on opioid agonist therapy and not in active withdrawal. We offered patients buprenorphine/naloxone to-go as standard of care and then administered a survey to record buprenorphine/naloxone to-go acceptance, the primary outcome. Survey domains included current substance use, prior experience with opioid agonist therapy, and buprenorphine/naloxone related opinions. Patient factors were examined for association with buprenorphine/naloxone to-go acceptance. Results Of the 89 patients enrolled, median age was 33 years, 27% were female, 67.4% had previously taken buprenorphine/naloxone, and 19.1% had never taken opioid agonist therapy. Overall, 78.7% believed that EDs should dispense buprenorphine/naloxone to-go packs. Thirty-eight (42.7%) patients accepted buprenorphine/naloxone to-go. Buprenorphine/naloxone to-go acceptance was associated with lack of prior opioid agonist therapy, less than 10 years of opioid use and no injection drug use. Reasons to accept included initiating treatment while in withdrawal; reasons to reject included prior unsatisfactory buprenorphine/naloxone experience and interest in other treatments. Conclusion Although less than half of our study population accepted buprenorphine/naloxone to-go when offered, most thought this intervention was beneficial. In isolation, ED buprenorphine/naloxone to-go will not meet the needs of all patients with opioid use disorder. Clinicians and policy makers should consider buprenorphine/naloxone to-go as a low-barrier option for opioid use disorder treatment from the ED when integrated with robust addiction care services.

The primary objective of this study was to measure the risk of return Emergency Department (ED) visits in patients presenting to the ED with a diagnosis of substance-induced psychosis. Secondary objectives included: (1) describing the characteristics of patients returning within 30 days to the ED with substance-induced psychosis, and (2) identifying risk factors associated with such ED return. At two urban sites from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2019, we included consecutive patients presenting to the ED with substance-induced psychosis defined by their ED discharge diagnosis of psychosis and clinical evidence of substance use. We described ED resources utilized by this patient population including ED time and disposition then subsequently described return visits within 30 days and characteristics among those patients who returned. We identified 611 unique patients presenting with substance-induced psychosis, with 813 total ED visits. The median age was 35 years (IQR 28–45), 71.4

Background: Integrated youth services (IYS) provide multidisciplinary care (including mental, physical, and social) prioritizing the needs of young people and their families. Despite a significant rise in emergency department (ED) visits by young Canadians with mental health and substance use (MHSU) concerns over the last decade, there remains a profound disconnect between EDs and MHSU integrated youth services. The first objective of this study was to better understand the assessment, treatment, and referral of young people (ages 12-24 years) presenting to the ED with MHSU concerns. The second objective was to explore how to improve the transition from the ED to IYS for young people with MHSU concerns. Methods: We conducted semi-structured one-on-one video and phone interviews with stakeholders in British Columbia, Canada in the summer of 2020. Snowball sampling was utilized, and participants (n=26) were reached, including ED physicians (n=6), social workers (n=4), nurses (n=2), an occupational therapist (n=1); a counselor (n=1); staff/leadership in IYS organizations (n=4); mental health/family workers (n=3); peer support workers (n=2), and parents (n=3). A thematic analysis (TA) was conducted using a deductive and inductive approach conceptually guided by the Social Ecological Model. Results: We identified three overarching themes, and factors to consider at all levels of the Social Ecological Model. At the interpersonal level inadequate communication between ED staff and young people affected overall care and contributed to negative experiences. At the organizational level, we identified considerations for assessments and the ED and the hospital (wait times, staffing issues, and the physical space). At the community level, the environment of IYS and other community services were important including wait times and hours of operation. Policy level factors identified include inadequate communication between services (e.g., different charting systems and documentation). Conclusions: This study provides insight into important long-term systemic issues and more immediate factors that need to be addressed to improve the delivery of care for young people with MHSU challenges. This research supports intervention development and implementation in the ED for young people with MHSU concerns.

ObjectivesPsychosis is a well established complication of non-prescription drug use. We sought to measure the 1-year mortality of emergency department patients with substance-induced psychosis (SIP). MethodsThis study was a multi-centre, retrospective electronic medical records review of patients presenting to the ED with substance-induced psychosis (SIP). We interrogated the hospital ED database from Jan 1, 2018 and Jan 1, 2019 to identify consecutive patients. All patients were followed for one year from index visit, and classified as alive/dead at that time. Patients were included in the study if they met the following criteria: 1) ED discharge diagnosis of psychosis NOS and a positive urine drugs of abuse screen (UDAS) or the patient verbally endorsed drug use, or 2) Mental disorder due to drug use and "disorganized thought", "bizarre behavior" or "delusional behavior" documented in the chart and one or more of the following criteria: a) arrival with police, b) mental health certification, c) physical restraints, d) chemical restraints. We excluded patients who were not British Columbia residents, since we were unable to ascertain if they were alive or dead at 1 year from their index ED visit. Primary statistical analysis was logistic regression for risk of death in 1 year, based on plausible risk factors, selected a priori. ResultsWe identified 813 presentations for SIP (620 unique patients). The median age of the entire cohort was 35 years (IQR 28-44), and 69.5% (n = 565) were male. Thirty five patients (4.3%; 95% CI 3.2-5.9) had died one year after their initial presentation to the ED for SIP. Separate multivariable logistic regression analyses, controlling for age, demonstrated schizophrenia (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.8-11.1) significantly associated with increased 1-year mortality. ConclusionsIn our study of patients presenting to the ED with SIP, the 1-year mortality was 4.3%. Controlling for age, schizophrenia was a notable risk factor for increased 1-year mortality.