Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Pharmacy-based preventive services for opioid use disorder: a survey of U.S. pharmacists

Addiction Science & Clinical Practice volume 19, Article number: 88 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Pharmacists play a key role in combating the opioid-related overdose epidemic in the United States (US), but little is known about their experience and willingness to deliver preventive services for opioid use disorder (OUD).

Aims

This study seeks to identify correlates of pharmacists’ concerns about drug use problems (prescription drug misuse/use disorder and illicit drug use/use disorder) as well as their practice experience delivering preventive services for OUD (e.g., asked about opioid use, provided advice, made a referral) and willingness to provide services to patients with drug use problems.

Design

An online survey of licensed US pharmacists was conducted. Participants were recruited from Community Pharmacy Enhanced Services Networks (CPESN) and state pharmacist associations (N = 1146).

Findings

Overall, 75% of surveyed pharmacists indicated having concerns about opioid use problems, and 62% had concerns about non-opioid drug use problems at their pharmacies. Pharmacists who were White, practiced at a rural location, worked at a chain pharmacy, had not received opioid-related training in the past year, or practiced screening patients for opioid use had elevated odds of perceiving concerns about opioid use problems in their practice settings. Pharmacists who were White, practiced at a rural location, or had not received opioid-related training in the past year had elevated odds of perceiving concerns about non-opioid (illicit) drug use problems. Being male, being White, or having received opioid-related training were associated with increased odds of screening patients for opioid use problems. Being White, having practiced at a rural location (vs. an urban location), being a pharmacy owner/manager, or having received opioid-related training were associated with increased odds of delivering opioid-related advice/intervention. Being male or having received opioid-related training were associated with increased odds of making a referral to OUD treatment. Finally, being male, being White, having practiced pharmacy services for under 6 years, having received opioid-related training for 2 h in the past year, or having performed OUD-related preventive services (asked about opioid use, provided advice, or made a referral) were associated with increased levels of commitment/readiness for providing care to patients with drug use problems.

Conclusions

The overall findings highlight pharmacists’ involvement with OUD preventive services. It is critical to promote opioid-related preventive service training for pharmacists and provide incentives/tools to help initiate a structured practice of delivering such preventive services.

Introduction

The opioid epidemic in the United States (US) has continued for over two decades [1]. There were an estimated 106,699 drug overdose deaths in 2021, representing an age-adjusted rate of 32.4 per 100,000 standard population in the US, and drug overdose death rates were higher in 2021 than in 2020 for all adult groups aged ≥ 25 years [2]. Opioids were involved in 75.4% of all drug overdose deaths in 2021 [2]. The rise in rates of opioid-related overdose deaths is related to multiple factors, such as an increase in the availability of prescription and illicit opioids (e.g., fentanyl), prescribing practices of some practitioners, opioid diversion/sharing, use of high-potency opioids, co-use of opioids and benzodiazepines, and polysubstance use [3,4,5,6].

Pharmacists dispense medications and have regular contact with patients at risk for opioid-related misuse or overdose. They are well-positioned to conduct opioid-related preventive services, including asking opioid-related questions or screening patients to identify red flags for intervention (e.g., asking opioid-related questions to identifying potential issues of diversion, improper prescribing, drug-drug interaction), educating patients about safe medication practices (e.g., proper storage, disposal), providing naloxone rescue kits as needed, delivering brief intervention for motivation toward behavioral change, and making referrals to treatment [7,8,9]. Major US pharmacist associations, including the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), have highlighted important roles of pharmacists regarding delivery of pharmacy-based substance use prevention services, education, and assistance to address opioid misuse and diversion through using approaches of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) (i.e., preventive services) [7, 10, 11].

Of note, pharmacists are ubiquitous. More than 90% of Americans live within five miles of a community pharmacy [12]. Pharmacists are available even in underserved or rural areas where opioid-related death rates are relatively high and the number of addiction treatment facilities are particularly limited [13]. National survey data indicated that 91% of surveyed participants reported “confidence in pharmacist-provided advice” [14]. To combat the ongoing opioid epidemic, pharmacists in the US submit controlled substance prescription information to and query (i.e., check) state prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) to address potential issues of inappropriate opioid use or misuse when dispensing controlled substances to patients [15]. The process of checking the PDMP provides opportunities to inform pharmacist screening, brief intervention, or referral to treatment delivery to patients.

Despite the continuing and escalating opioid epidemic [1], little is known about US pharmacists’ concerns about opioid-related problems, practices of opioid-related preventive services, and commitment/willingness to provide services to individuals with opioid/drug use problems. A review study has reported five studies on US pharmacists’ roles/perceptions in preventing opioid misuse, and all are qualitative data (e.g., qualitative interviews, focus groups, open-ended questions) [16]. Overall, these studies suggest that education/training is a primary factor influencing pharmacists’ attitudes toward and skills related to providing opioid-related preventive services and that pharmacists’ commitment for delivering preventive services is a key factor for improving pharmacists’ practices of delivering such services [16]. While education/training is a primary factor influencing pharmacists’ attitudes, there are other factors that can be targeted and can be found in the literature.

The goal of this study was to conduct a survey of pharmacists to understand US pharmacists’ concerns regarding opioid-related problems, practices of opioid-related preventive services, and commitment/readiness to provide services to individuals with opioid/drug use problems (i.e., prescription drug misuse/use disorder and illicit drug use/use disorder). An online survey was used to help recruit pharmacists nationwide. Aims were to: (1) determine the extent of pharmacists’ concerns about opioid-related problems and practices of opioid-related preventive services; (2) examine whether pharmacists’ demographics, pharmacy characteristics, and opioid-related education/training were associated with having concerns about opioid-related problems and/or delivering opioid-related preventive services; (3) determine whether pharmacists’ demographics, pharmacy characteristics, opioid-related education/training, and practices of opioid-related preventive services were associated with their commitment/readiness for providing services to individuals with opioid or other drug use problems; and (4) explore barriers to delivering preventive services for future improvement [16, 17].

Methods

Design

An online survey (i.e., Qualtrics) was used to investigate pharmacists’ concerns about opioid use problems, experience delivering preventive services for opioid-related problems, and their commitment/readiness for working with individuals with drug use problems [18]. We defined in the survey that opioids included prescription opioid medications and illicit opioids. In addition, opioid use problems were defined broadly to include opioid misuse (e.g., using opioids without a prescription; using opioids in greater amounts, more often, or longer than the patient was told to take them; or using opioids in any other way a doctor did not direct the patient to use), opioid-involved overdoses, and opioid use disorder. When the survey item was about prescription opioids, we specifically indicated prescription opioids. This study was approved by Duke University Health System Institutional Review Board.

Measure

Demographic and pharmacy-related characteristics

Participants were asked about their demographics (e.g., age, sex, race, ethnicity) and pharmacy characteristics, including region, location of their practice (rural, urban, suburban), type of pharmacy, years in practice, and role at the pharmacy. Participants were also asked about the total number of lecture/seminar hours (including Continuing Pharmacy Education [CPE]) attended on substance use/misuse screening and referral to treatment for OUD in the past year.

Experience delivering preventive services and barriers

Participants were asked about their concerns about opioid use problems in their pharmacy practice settings and experience delivering preventive services for opioid-related problems (i.e., asked about patients’ opioid use among adult patients prescribed opioids, discussed with or advised patients to change their opioid use among adult patients who may be at high risk for having OUD, and made any kind of referral for OUD treatment among adult patients who may have an OUD and who have not received medication treatment for it). Preventive services items explored pharmacists’ practice of screening patients for opioid-related problems (i.e., asked opioid-related questions), conducting interventions (i.e., provided advice), and making a referral to OUD treatment (i.e., SBIRT) [19, 20]. This focus on the SBIRT is in line with the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force’s framework that emphasizes screening for potential problems and then offering a brief intervention and/or referral to treatment as needed [21]. This SBIRT approach has been considered as a critical pharmacy service for obtaining policy support to reimburse for US pharmacists’ services, and the skill for delivering SBIRT has been recommended by the Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance Use and Addiction (AMERSA) as one core competency for US pharmacists to address substance use/addiction [17, 19, 20]. Participants then were asked to identify a list of potential barriers to engaging their patients in substance use disorder treatment conversations, including referral to addiction treatment. These items were developed based on a consensus-based approach with the other investigators on the team as well as experience and data from relevant pharmacy-based studies [19, 20, 22,23,24,25,26].

Commitment/readiness for providing care to individuals with drug use problems

The Drug and Drug Problems Perceptions Questionnaire (DDPPQ) was used to assess pharmacists’ therapeutic commitment and readiness for working with individuals with drug use problems (including opioids) [27]. Responses to DDPPQ items (ranging from 1 to 7) were summarized using a total score with a higher score indicating a higher level of commitment/readiness for working with patients with drug use problems and a lower score indicating a lower level of commitment/readiness. The possible range of a total score is 20–140.

Pilot survey

To identify potential issues with the clarity of survey items/content, logistical problems, and technical issues of navigating the online survey system (i.e., Qualtrics), we recruited 10 pharmacists from the Community Pharmacy Enhanced Services Network (CPESN) USA (CPESN USA) to pilot test the survey [28]. Each participant completed the online survey and then participated in a virtual meeting with members of the investigative team to review all survey items and discuss their feedback and suggestions for improving the survey content and entire process. The investigative team (principal investigator, co-investigator, and members of the Data and Statistics Center/The Emmes Company) reviewed and addressed all issues identified from the pilot test to improve the survey. Each pilot participant received a gift card of $300 to compensate for time.

Sample

Adults licensed as pharmacists in the US at the time of this survey were eligible to participate in the study. The target sample size was 1062 participants based on the precision analysis indicating that the size would produce reliable estimates. Potential participants were recruited from the CPESN USA and state pharmacist associations. The CPESN USA includes over 3,500 community pharmacies participating in 49 local CPESN networks in 44 states [28].

Survey recruitment

The online survey (i.e., main survey) was initiated on 8/24/2021 and finished on 8/22/2022. The study invitation with a survey link was distributed through the CPESN USA’s newsletters by emails. Eligible participants could use the survey link to complete the informed consent and survey items. Each survey completer received a gift card of $150 to compensate for time.

The survey was conducted during the time of the COVID-19 pandemic. On August 4, 2021, the US Department of Health and Human Services issued an Amendment to Declaration Under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act for Medical Countermeasures Against COVID-19 to authorize pharmacists to order and administer FDA authorized or FDA licensed COVID-19 vaccines to persons aged ≥ 3 years [29]. Thus, pharmacists were intensively involved in public health emergency preparedness and response, including prevention through routine COVID-19 vaccinations and ensuring medication access [30].

After 8 months of initiating the survey, we recruited 608 survey completers from the CPESN USA (i.e., excluded pilot participants). We received feedback from CPESN staff that pharmacists were involved with providing the COVID-19 vaccination services and that participating in a study was not their priority. We reviewed the participants’ distribution by state and amended the study protocol with an IRB approval to recruit pharmacists from states with a small number of participants (< 10 participants) via state pharmacist associations. We contacted staff (e.g., representatives) of 31 state pharmacist associations; of them, staff of 10 states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin) agreed to distribute the survey invitation to their networks via their associations’ newsletters. After recruiting pharmacists from these 10 state pharmacists’ associations, we met the recruitment target within approximately 2 months.

Statistical analyses

We conducted descriptive analyses to characterize participants’ demographics and pharmacist-related characteristics. We used logistic regression analysis to determine whether pharmacists’ demographics, pharmacy-related characteristics, opioid-related training/education, and experience practicing opioid-related preventive services were associated with their concerns about opioid and non-opioid drug use problems at their practice settings. We also used logistic regression analysis to determine whether pharmacists’ demographics, pharmacy-related characteristics, and opioid-related training/education were associated with their practice of delivering opioid-related preventive services. Further, we conducted linear regression analysis to determine whether pharmacists’ demographics, pharmacy-related characteristics, opioid-related training/education, and experience delivering preventive services were associated with their commitment/readiness for providing care to individuals with opioid/drug use problems. Analyses were conducted in SAS Version 9.4 [31].

Results

Recruitment

A total of 2589 individuals clicked the survey link; 2314 (89%) individuals signed the informed consent, and 1146 (44%) individuals completed the survey (i.e., respondents). Overall, pharmacists from 47 states and the District of Columbia (DC) participated in the online survey. To help ensure data integrity, we used Qualtrics’ fraud detection features to identify fraudulent responses, including ReCaptcha, duplicate, and fraud scores [18]. As summarized in Table 1, non-respondents included 399 (17%) individuals who stopped the survey early, 1 individual who resided outside the US (i.e., not eligible/not a US pharmacist), and 768 (33%) individuals who were considered fraudulent based on fraud detection scores and the investigative team’s review of survey data indicating fraudulent responses. The latter included a short duration of completing the survey (< 15 min) and non-US pharmacists. A survey can be fraudulent for more than one reason mentioned above.

Table 1 Summary of participant disposition
Full size table

Demographic and pharmacy characteristics

Overall, 1146 respondents were recruited from 47 states and DC (Alaska, Maine, and Rhode Island were states not represented). As shown in Table 2 53.75% of respondents were female, 49.04% were aged 35–54 years, 96.16% were not Hispanic/Latino, 75.31% were White, 13.53% were Asian, and 5.32% were Black/African American. In addition, 31.94% resided in the Midwest region (South, 30.37%; Northeast, 20.16%; West, 17.54%), 37.87% practiced in an urban area (suburban, 32.90%; rural, 29.23%), 64.05% worked at an independent pharmacy (chain, 17.36%, hospital/clinic, 8.73%; supermarket/merchandiser, 7.42%, other, 2.44%), 52.79% had more than 10 years of pharmacy experience, and 55.15% were pharmacy managers/owners.

Table 2 Demographics and pharmacist characteristics of participants (N = 1146)
Full size table

Concerns about opioid/drug use problems

Overall, 75.48% of respondents reported having concerns about opioid use problems (misuse, illicit use, or use disorder) at their pharmacy practice sites, and 62.04% reported having concerns about non-opioid drug use problems (illicit and non-opioid drugs) at their practice sites. Results of adjusted logistic regression analyses of factors associated with having concerns about opioid and drug use problems at their pharmacy practice sites are summarized in Table 3. Being Black/African American or Asian (vs. being White), practicing pharmacy services at an urban or suburban location (vs. rural location), being employed at a supermarket/merchandiser/other pharmacy (vs. chain pharmacy), and having received 3 + hours of opioid-related education/training in the past year (vs. no training) were associated with having lower odds of perceiving concerns about opioid use problems, while having asked their patients’ about opioid use (vs. no) was associated with increased odds of perceiving concerns.

Table 3 Adjusted logistic regression of pharmacists’ concerns about opioid and illicit drug use problems in their community practice setting (N = 1146)
Full size table

In addition, being Asian (vs. being White), practicing at an urban or suburban location (vs. rural location), and having received 3 + hours of opioid-related education/training in the past year (vs. no training) were associated with lower odds of perceiving concerns about non-opioid drug use problems.

Experience delivering preventive services for OUD

Overall, 86.04% of respondents had asked about patients’ opioid use among adult patients prescribed opioids, 86.14% had discussed with or advised patients to change their opioid use among adult patients who may be at high risk for having opioid use problems, and 54.85% had made a referral to OUD treatment among adult patients who may have an OUD and who have not received medication treatment for OUD.

Results of adjusted logistic regression analyses of factors associated with delivering preventive services are summarized in Table 4. Being female, being Asian (vs. being White), and having not received opioid-related training/education in the past year were associated with decreased odds of screening patients for opioid use problems.

Table 4 Adjusted logistic regression analysis of pharmacists’ involvement with opioid use screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for opioid use disorder
Full size table

Additionally, being Black/African American or Asian (vs. being White) and working at an urban location (vs. rural location) were associated with decreased odds of discussing with or advising patients to change their opioid use among adult patients who may be at high risk for having opioid use problems, while being a pharmacy owner/manager and having received opioid-related training/education in the past year (vs. no training) were associated with increased odds of discussing with or advising patients to change their opioid use.

Further, being female (vs. being male) was associated with decreased odds of making a referral to OUD treatment, while having received opioid-related training in the past year (vs. no training) was associated with increased odds.

Commitment/readiness for providing care to patients with drug use problems

Overall, the range of the DDPPQ score (i.e., commitment/readiness for providing care to patients with drug use problems) is 47–140, and its mean is 99.57 (standard deviation = 14.64). Results of an adjusted linear regression analysis of factors associated with pharmacists’ commitment/readiness for providing care to patients with drug use problems (i.e., the DDPPQ score) are summarized in Table 5. Being female, being Asian (vs. being White), and having practiced for 6–10 years (vs. <6 years) were associated with decreased levels of commitment/readiness, while having received 2 h of opioid-related training in the past year (vs. no training), having asked patients about their prescription opioids, having discussed with or advised patients to change their opioid use, and having made a referral to OUD treatment were associated with increased levels of commitment/readiness for providing care to patients with drug use problems.

Table 5 Linear regression of pharmacists’ perceived commitment and readiness for providing care to individuals with drug use problems
Full size table

Barrier to providing care to patients with drug use problems

Table 6 summarizes pharmacists’ perceived barriers to engaging their patients in substance use disorder treatment conversations, including referral to addiction treatment. Commonly endorsed barriers included time constraints or being too busy (74.17%), shortage of pharmacy staff (60.47%), not having suitable screening tools or instruments to screen patients for drug misuse (58.46%), not having access to patients’ urine drug screen results to confirm drug use (58.29%), not knowing where to refer patients (56.02%), not having professional relationships with substance use disorder treatment programs (55.24%), not having substance use disorder treatment program pamphlets available (50.17%), believing that patients would resent being asked about substance use disorder treatment (48.25%), having limited knowledge about substance use disorder treatment and options (42.67%), and feeling awkward about talking with patients about substance use disorder treatment (40.31%).

Table 6 Pharmacists’ perceived barriers to engaging their patients in substance use disorder treatment conversations, including referral to addiction treatment
Full size table

Discussion

Pharmacists are medication experts and can be natural partners of prescribers/clinicians in applying the strategy of screening, brief intervention (e.g., < 15 min), and referral to treatment (i.e., SBIRT) to identify patient safety concerns, prevent opioid/drug misuse, and help with treatment referrals as needed [9, 17]. This is the first nationwide study on US pharmacists’ concerns about opioid-related problems, delivery of opioid-related preventive services, and commitment/readiness to provide services to individuals with drug use problems. It included a geographically diverse sample of pharmacists from 47 states and DC, which also recruited a large sample of pharmacists from rural areas where pharmacy-based opioid preventive services are particularly needed to help address opioid/drug use problems [13, 32]. Findings have important implications for informing pharmacists’ training on opioid/drug addiction and future involvement in delivering opioid-related preventive services to address opioid/drug use problems [17].

A prior survey of US pharmacists in Tennessee found that 87.5% of surveyed pharmacists perceived opioid abuse to be a problem in their practice settings [22]. Pharmacists perceived that their communication with patients/prescribers would deter opioid abuse; however, the results were based on descriptive findings (i.e., no data on factors associated with pharmacists’ perceived concerns or communication with patients/prescribers) [22]. We found that the majority of surveyed pharmacists not only reported having concerns about opioid use problems, but reported having concerns about non-opioid illicit drug use problems. Pharmacists’ concerns about illicit drug use are consistent with polydrug use patterns among individuals with OUD and with the ongoing opioid epidemic escalated by illicit drug-involved deaths [1, 33]. The findings reveal pharmacists’ recognition of both opioid and illicit drug use problems among patients seen at pharmacies, which is an important rationale for providing pharmacy owners/managers and staff pharmacists with opioid-related training and resources (e.g., screening tool, addiction treatment program pamphlets) to help deliver preventive services.

This study adds new findings to the literature by revealing modifiable factors to inform interventions for enhancing pharmacists’ awareness of opioid/drug misuse, delivery of opioid-related preventive services, and commitment/readiness for providing services to individuals with drug misuse. Of note, we found that pharmacists’ practice of asking patients about their opioid use was positively associated with having concerns about opioid misuse. Pharmacists may use patients’ PDMP reports (e.g., multiple or unauthorized opioid prescriptions) to ask patients about their opioid use and then identify opioid misuse, which may reinforce the practice of conducting screening or brief intervention services. Thus, pharmacists can receive opioid-related continuing pharmacy education (CPE) in order to stimulate and increase their involvement with delivering opioid-related preventive services.

Pharmacists working in rural areas indicated relatively high concerns about opioid and illicit drug misuse. They also were more likely than pharmacists in urban areas to deliver intervention services (i.e., had discussed with or advised patients to change their opioid use based on the PDMP report). Such findings may be related to the perceived severity of the enduring opioid epidemic and shortages of physicians who treat OUD in the rural areas [32, 34, 35]. The lack of addiction treatment capability and limited access to treatment for opioid/drug use disorders in the rural areas are associated with severe issues among individuals with opioid/drug use problems [32, 36]. The findings suggest that pharmacists in rural areas may be invested with more responsibilities and more willing than those in urban areas to deliver opioid-related preventive services, should they receive proper training (e.g., opioid-related CPE) to enhance their knowledge/confidence and/or are provided with addiction treatment program pamphlets [22, 37].

While there were no sex differences in perceiving concerns about opioid/drug misuse, male pharmacists were found to be more likely than female pharmacists to engage in delivering preventive services that included asking patients about their opioid use and making a referral to OUD treatment. This difference may suggest the existence of a lower level of perceived self-efficacy of communication skills about opioid-related services or a higher level of stigma towards patients with opioid/drug use problems among female pharmacists than male pharmacists [22, 38]. Future research should investigate how self-efficacy of delivering opioid-related services and stigma towards patients with opioid/drug misuse affect pharmacists’ practice of preventive services for individuals with opioid/drug use problems [22, 37, 39].

Further, our results indicate the critical importance of encouraging pharmacists to receive education on opioid-related preventive services (e.g., CPE). Pharmacists who receive 3 + hours of education on opioid-related preventive services in the past year were less likely than pharmacists with no education in the past year to perceive concerns about opioid and illicit drug misuse in their practice settings. It is possible that pharmacists who have received up-to-date opioid-related training perceive better confidence in communicating with patients about opioid-related issues and thus have less concerns. For example, we found that pharmacists who received opioid-related education in the past year (e.g., CPE on opioid-related preventive services) were more likely than those without such education to deliver screening, interventions, and referrals to OUD treatment services.

Furthermore, the findings on factors associated with pharmacists’ commitment/readiness for providing services to individuals with drug use problems provide additional support for results of pharmacists’ practice of delivering opioid-related preventive services. Pharmacists who were male or White, received education on opioid-related preventive services, or had delivered any of screening, intervention, or referral to treatment services had relatively high levels of commitment/readiness for providing services to individuals with drug use problems. The results suggest that education interventions aimed at improving pharmacists’ practice of delivering opioid-related preventive services may also improve pharmacists’ readiness for providing services to individuals with non-opioid illicit drug use problems. Pharmacists with less than 6 years of experience were more likely than those with 6–10 years of experience to perceive commitment/readiness for providing services to individuals with drug use problems, which may be related to having more hours of opioid-related training as part of the recently completed education or may indicate the presence of less stigma towards individuals with drug use problems among younger generations of pharmacists [38].

Finally, pharmacists face specific barriers in order to be able to deliver preventive services. The main barrier identified was time constraints due to high workloads, burnout, or staff shortages that has been highlighted and exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic [40, 41]. Policy-support for reimbursing pharmacy staff’s time for delivering SBIRT services, such as use of a community-based value-driven care initiative model, may enhance pharmacists’ capability to deliver such preventive services [42]. Results regarding barriers also revealed that training/education (e.g., CPE) should include specific contents for addressing stigma, communication strategies with drug-using individuals, and resources for screening tools, OUD treatment options, and contact for addiction treatment programs [43].

Limitations

These results could be influenced by self-report bias and selection bias. Pharmacists who are aware of or have concerns about the US opioid epidemic may have an elevated likelihood of responding to the survey invitation. In addition, the results reflect associations (i.e., no causality). Further, the nature of an online survey design constrains calculation of a survey response rate. The design provides only information about whether an individual clicked the survey link to begin the survey, signed the informed consent, and completed the survey. The results from an online survey also are not representative of the US pharmacists (e.g., selection bias), and the quantitative survey items have a limitation for exploring contextual factors, such as stigma. The latter could use a qualitative interview design. This study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, which could affect pharmacists’ willingness to respond to a survey. Past studies have shown the challenge of conducting surveys of US pharmacists, which generally found a low response rate (e.g., 1.7–40%) [22, 44,45,46,47]. Nonetheless, this study reached its recruitment goal by utilizing help from staff of the CPESN USA and state pharmacist associations to distribute survey invitations to their members.

To help ensure validity of survey participants, we conducted the survey through connections with staff of the CPESN USA and state pharmacist associations and required the online survey system to collect each participant’s email address and physical address (i.e., required data fields). We carefully reviewed participants’ addresses to verify their eligibility and requested that survey completers to provide a copy of their pharmacist license before issuing the gift card. We also used Qualtrics’ fraud detection features to identify fraudulent responses and removed them from the final dataset (ReCaptcha, duplicate response detection, bot detection, RelevantID, and fraud scores) [18]. Therefore, we implemented various strategies to help improve the quality of the data.

Conclusion

Findings of this study were based on a large sample of US pharmacists recruited from 47 states and DC that included pharmacists from rural, suburban, and urban areas employed at all main types of pharmacy settings. Pharmacists in general express concerns about both opioid and non-opioid drug use problems at their practice settings. Having received opioid-related training on screening, intervention, and referral to treatment in the past year is positively associated with their practice of delivering these services. Pharmacists’ experience delivering such opioid-related preventive services also is positively related to their commitment/readiness for providing services to individuals with opioid/drug use problems in the future. Pharmacy staff’s capability of and involvement with delivering SBIRT services is considered a cornerstone of future pharmacy practice [42]. Research is needed to establish feasible workflows and strategies for enabling pharmacy-based SBIRT services [20, 48, 49]. State pharmacy boards and pharmacist associations could consider establishing an OUD certification or addiction training program to empower pharmacy staff’s involvement with delivering SBIRT services.

Finally, the US Congress passed the Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment (MAT) Act in December 2022 to remove the federal legal barrier to pharmacist buprenorphine prescribing, which permits each state to decide whether or not to allow pharmacists to prescribe buprenorphine as an additional access point to reduce opioid overdoses [50]. About 10 states allow pharmacists to prescribe controlled substances under collaborative practice agreements (e.g., with healthcare providers) [50, 51]. The MAT Act reinforces the importance of developing pharmacists’ skills of and involvement with delivering SBIRT services for OUD in order to promote additional states’ support for enabling pharmacists to prescribe buprenorphine and increase access to OUD treatment.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Abbreviations

APhA:

American Pharmacists Association

ASHP:

American Society of Health-System Pharmacists

CPE:

Continuing Pharmacy Education

CPESN:

Community Pharmacy Enhanced Services Network

CPESN USA:

Community Pharmacy Enhanced Services Network USA

DC:

District of Columbia

DDPPQ:

Drug and Drug Problems Perceptions Questionnaire

FDA:

Food and Drug Administration

PDMPs:

Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs

OUD:

Opioid Use Disorder

SBIRT:

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment

US:

United States

References

  1. Ahmad FB, Cisewski JA, Rossen LM, Sutton P. Provisional drug overdose death counts. National Center for Health Statistics. 2023. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm

  2. Spencer MR, Miniño AM, Warner M. Drug Overdose Deaths in the United States, 2001–2021. NCHS Data Brief, no 457. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics 2022. https://doi.org/10.15620/cdc:122556

  3. Gudin JA, Mogali S, Jones JD, Comer SD. Risks, management, and monitoring of combination opioid, benzodiazepines, and/or alcohol use. Postgrad Med. 2013;125(4):115–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. McHugh RK, Nielsen S, Weiss RD. Prescription drug abuse: from epidemiology to public policy. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2015;48(1):1–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Paulozzi LJ. Prescription drug overdoses: a review. J Saf Res. 2012;43(4):283–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rudd RA. Increases in drug and opioid-involved overdose deaths—United States, 2010–2015. MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report. 2016;65.

  7. American Pharmacists Association (APhA). Pharmacists’ role in addressing opioid abuse, addiction, and diversion. J Am Pharmacists Association. 2014;54(1):e5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bratberg JP, Smothers ZP, Collins K, Erstad B, Ruiz Veve J, Muzyk AJ. Pharmacists and the opioid crisis: a narrative review of pharmacists’ practice roles. J Am Coll Clin Pharm. 2020;3(2):478–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.1171. https://accpjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jarrett JB, Bratberg J, Burns AL, Cochran G, DiPaula BA, Legreid Dopp A, Elmes A, Green TC, Hill LG, Homsted F, Hsia SL, Matthews ML, Ghitza UE, Wu LT, Bart G. Research priorities for expansion of opioid use disorder treatment in the Community Pharmacy. Subst Abus. 2023;44(4):264–76.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP). ASHP statement on the pharmacist’s role in substance abuse prevention, education, and assistance. Am J health-system Pharm. 2014;71(3):243–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jungnickel PW, Desimone EM, Kissack JC, Lawson LA, Murawski MM, Patterson BJ, Rospond RM, Scott DM, Athay J, AACP Special Committee on Substance Abuse and Pharmacy Education. Report of the AACP Special Committee on Substance Abuse and Pharmacy Education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2010;74(10):S11. https://doi.org/10.5688/aj7410s11. PMID: 21436899; PMCID: PMC3058467.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Haberkorn L. Easy to reach and ready to help: not just dispensing medication. Pharm Today. 2018;24(11):38–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Look KA, Kile M, Morgan K, Roberts A. Community pharmacies as access points for addiction treatment. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(4):404–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. National Association of Chain Drug Stores (NACDS). 2013. NACDS Impact Report. Community pharmacy fills gaps in access and affordability for patients, payers. March 2013, page 1–5. http://rximpact.nacds.org/pdfs/rximpact_0313.pdf

  15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2021. Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs). https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/pdmp/index.html#:~:text=When%20pharmacists%20dispense%20controlled%20substances,%E2%80%9D%20i.e.%2C%20under%20five%20minutes

  16. Offu OF, Visram S, Rathbone AP, Lindsey L. Factors influencing pharmacists’ roles in preventing prescription and over-the-counter opioid misuse: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. Int J Pharm Pract 2023 Dec 27:riad090. https://academic.oup.com/ijpp/advance-article/doi/https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riad090/7502464

  17. Bratberg J, Pharmacy. Addressing substance use in the 21st century. Subst Abuse 2019;40(4):421-434.

  18. Griffin M, Martino RJ, LoSchiavo C, Comer-Carruthers C, Krause KD, Stults CB, Halkitis PN. Ensuring survey research data integrity in the era of internet bots. Qual Quantity 2022;56(4):2841-2852.

  19. Babor TF, Del Boca F, Bray JW. Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment: implications of SAMHSA’s SBIRT initiative for substance abuse policy and practice. Addiction. 2017;112:110–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Shonesy BC, Williams D, Simmons D, Dorval E, Gitlow S, Gustin RM, Screening. Brief intervention, and referral to treatment in a Retail Pharmacy setting: the Pharmacist’s role in identifying and addressing risk of Substance Use Disorder. J Addict Med. 2019;13(5):403–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Lin K. Screening for unhealthy drug use: Recommendation Statement. Am Family Phys. 2021;103(2):107–12.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hagemeier NE, Murawski MM, Lopez NC, Alamian A, Pack RP. Theoretical exploration of Tennessee community pharmacists’ perceptions regarding opioid pain reliever abuse communication. Res Social Adm Pharm 2014 May-Jun;10(3):562-75.

  23. Wu LT, John WS, Ghitza UE, Wahle A, Matthews AG, Lewis M, Hart B, Hubbard Z, Bowlby LA, Greenblatt LH, Mannelli P. Pharm-OUD-Care Collaborative investigators. Buprenorphine physician-pharmacist collaboration in the management of patients with opioid use disorder: results from a multisite study of the National drug abuse treatment clinical trials network. Addiction. 2021;116(7):1805–16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Wu LT, John WS, Morse E, Adkins S, Pippin J, Brooner R, Schwartz RP. Opioid treatment program and community pharmacy collaboration for methadone maintenance treatment: results from a feasibility clinical trial. Addiction. 2022;117(2):444–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wu LT, Mannelli P, John WS, Anderson A, Schwartz RP. Pharmacy-based methadone treatment in the US: views of pharmacists and opioid treatment program staff. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2023;18(1):55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Wu LT, John WS, Mannelli P, Morse ED, Anderson A, Schwartz RP. Patient perspectives on community pharmacy administered and dispensing of methadone treatment for opioid use disorder: a qualitative study in the U.S. Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2023;18(1):45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Watson H, Maclaren W, Kerr S. Staff attitudes towards working with drug users: development of the drug problems perceptions Questionnaire. Addiction. 2007;102(2):206–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. CPESN. 2023. About CPESN USA. https://cpesn.com/about-cpesn-usa#:~:text=CPESN%20USA%20is%20America’s%20first,fourth%20largest%20single%20contracting%20organization.

  29. Federal register 2021. Eighth Amendment to Declaration Under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act for Medical Countermeasures Against COVID-19. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/08/04/2021-16681/eighth-amendment-to-declaration-under-the-public-readiness-and-emergency-preparedness-act-for

  30. Aruru M, Truong HA, Clark S. Pharmacy emergency preparedness and response (PEPR): a proposed framework for expanding pharmacy professionals’ roles and contributions to emergency preparedness and response during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Res Social Administrative Pharm. 2021;17(1):1967–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. SAS Institute Inc. 2013.

  32. Andrilla CH, Moore TE, Patterson DG. Overcoming barriers to prescribing buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder: recommendations from rural physicians. J Rural Health. 2019;35(1):113–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wu LT, Woody GE, Yang C, Mannelli P, Blazer DG. Differences in onset and abuse/dependence episodes between prescription opioids and heroin: results from the national epidemiologic survey on Alcohol and related conditions. Subst Abuse Rehabilitation. 2011;2:77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Jones CM, Campopiano M, Baldwin G, McCance-Katz E. National and state treatment need and capacity for opioid agonist medication-assisted treatment. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(8):e55–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Korthuis PT, Cook RR, Foot CA, Leichtling G, Tsui JI, Stopka TJ, Leahy J, Jenkins WD, Baker R, Chan B, Crane HM. Association of methamphetamine and opioid use with nonfatal overdose in rural communities. JAMA Netw open. 2022;5(8):e2226544.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Hoover DB, Korthuis PT, Waddell EN, et al. Recent incarceration, Substance Use, Overdose, and Service Use among people who Use drugs in Rural communities. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(11):e2342222.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Werremeyer A, Strand MA, Eukel H, Skoy E, Steig J, Frenzel O. Longitudinal evaluation of pharmacists’ social distance preference and attitudes toward patients with opioid misuse following an educational training program. Substance Abuse. 2022;43(1):1051–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Werremeyer A, Mosher S, Eukel H, Skoy E, Steig J, Frenzel O, Strand MA. Pharmacists’ stigma toward patients engaged in opioid misuse: when social distance does not mean disease prevention. Substance Abuse. 2021;42(4):919–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bakos-Block CR, Al Rawwad T, Cardenas-Turanzas M, Champagne-Langabeer T. Contact based intervention reduces stigma among pharmacy students. Currents Pharm Teach Learn. 2022;14(12):1471–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bookwalter CM. Challenges in community pharmacy during COVID-19: the perfect storm for personnel burnout. US Pharm. 2021;46(5):28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Chen J, Cho SL. Shortages persist in an Evolving Profession. Pharm Times. 2023;6(4):10–1. https://www.pharmacytimes.com/view/shortages-persist-in-an-evolving-profession.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Trygstad T, SBIRT Spells Cornerstone of Future Pharmacy Practice. Pharm Times. 2022;8(8):20–1. https://www.pharmacytimes.com/view/sbirt-spells-cornerstone-of-future-pharmacy-practice.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Scheinberg N, Andersen R, Gruver M, Kim SH. Substance misuse training in pharmacy education: results from a pilot study on the integration of an interprofessional experience. Heliyon. 2023;9(2):e13122.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Hardigan PC, Popovici I, Carvajal MJ. Response rate, response time, and economic costs of survey research: a randomized trial of practicing pharmacists. Res Social Administrative Pharm. 2016;12(1):141–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rudolph SE, Branham AR, Rhodes LA, Moose JS, Marciniak MW. Identifying barriers to dispensing naloxone: a survey of community pharmacists in North Carolina. J Am Pharmacists Association. 2018;58(4):S55–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Salwan A, Hagemeier NE, Tudiver F, Dowling-McClay K, Foster KN, Arnold J, Alamian A, Pack RP. Community pharmacist engagement in opioid use disorder prevention and treatment behaviors: A descriptive analysis. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2020 Nov-Dec;60(6):e173-e178.

  47. Shcherbakova N. The delivery mode matters when surveying US practicing pharmacists: the reason to say’no’to the hybrid method. Res Social Administrative Pharmacy: RSAP. 2015;12(1):169–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Kenney A, Cox N, Bryan MA, Cochran G. Brief intervention medication therapy management: establishment of an opioid misuse intervention model delivered in a community pharmacy. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2021;78(4):310–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Rao D, McAtee C, Mercy M, Shiyanbola OO, Ford JH 2. Nd. An implementation-focused qualitative exploration of Pharmacist needs regarding an opioid use disorder screening and brief intervention. Subst Use Addctn J. 2024;45(1):24–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Adams JA, Chopski NL, Adams AJ. Opportunities for pharmacist prescriptive authority of buprenorphine following passage of the mainstreaming addiction treatment (MAT) act. J Am Pharmacists Association. 2023;63(5):1495–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Cheetham A, Grist E, Nielsen S. Pharmacist-prescriber collaborative models of care for opioid use disorder: an overview of recent research. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2024;37(4):251–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all study participants, Alyssa Anderson (Duke University School of Medicine), and Yanping Liu (National Institute on Drug Abuse).

Funding

This study (CTN-0105) was made possible by research support from the National Institutes of Health HEAL Initiative under award number UG1DA040317-05S3 and the National Institutes of Health (UG1DA040317, 75N9501920013, and 7595020F0005). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or its NIH HEAL Initiative. The sponsoring agency had no further role in the study design and analysis, the writing of the report, or the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA

    Li-Tzy Wu & Paolo Mannelli

  2. Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA

    Li-Tzy Wu

  3. Center for Child and Family Policy, Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

    Li-Tzy Wu

  4. Duke Institute For Brain Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

    Li-Tzy Wu

  5. The Emmes Company, LLC, Rockville, MD, USA

    Jacquie King, Kathryn Hefner, Mark Schactman, Abigail G. Matthews & Nathaniel Levitt

  6. Cardinal Health, Dublin, OH, USA

    William John

  7. Department of Pharmacy Practice, East Tennessee State University Gatton College of Pharmacy, Johnson City, TN, USA

    Nicholas Hagemeier

Authors
  1. Li-Tzy Wu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jacquie King
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kathryn Hefner
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mark Schactman
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. William John
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nicholas Hagemeier
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Abigail G. Matthews
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Nathaniel Levitt
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Paolo Mannelli
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

L-T.W. obtained the research funding, supervised the investigative team, designed this study, contributed to the data analysis plan, reviewed the findings, interpreted the findings, wrote the main manuscript text, and revised the final manuscript for important intellectual content. J.K. contributed to the data analysis plan, conducted data analysis, and reviewed the final manuscript for important intellectual content. K.H. contributed to the survey design and data collection and reviewed/revised the final manuscript for important intellectual content. M.S. contributed to the data analysis plan/analysis and reviewed the final manuscript for important intellectual content. W.J. contributed to the survey design, assisted with data collection and participant payment, and reviewed the final manuscript for important intellectual content. N.H. contributed to the survey design and reviewed/revised the final manuscript for important intellectual content. A.G.M. contributed to the precision/power analysis and reviewed the final manuscript for important intellectual content. N.L. conducted the database management, monitored data quality issues, and reviewed the final manuscript for important intellectual content. P.M. contributed to the survey design and reviewed/revised the final manuscript for important intellectual content.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Li-Tzy Wu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Duke University Health System Institutional Review Board.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, LT., King, J., Hefner, K. et al. Pharmacy-based preventive services for opioid use disorder: a survey of U.S. pharmacists. Addict Sci Clin Pract 19, 88 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-024-00519-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13722-024-00519-w

Keywords

Addiction Science & Clinical Practice

ISSN: 1940-0640