Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38449098›Full record

ArticlePrehospital and disaster medicine2024

Adverse Effects After Prehospital Administration of Naloxone by Bystanders: A Preliminary Study.

Daniel Du Pont, Rebecca Fenderson, Krystal Hunter, Alexander Kuc, Gerard Carroll

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Prehospital and disaster medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. RECOVER Guidelines: First Aid in Dogs and Cats. Evidence and Knowledge Gap Analysis With Treatment Recommendations.Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001) · 2026
    Article
  2. RECOVER Guidelines: First Aid for Dogs and Cats. Clinical Guidelines.Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001) · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel Du PontDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaUSA.ORCID 0000-0002-3162-0523
Rebecca FendersonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Cooper University Hospital, Camden, New JerseyUSA.
Krystal HunterCooper Research Institute, Cooper Medical School of Rowan University, Camden, New JerseyUSA.
Alexander KucDivision of EMS and Disaster Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Cooper Medical School of Rowan University, Camden, New JerseyUSA.
Gerard CarrollDivision of EMS and Disaster Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Cooper Medical School of Rowan University, Camden, New JerseyUSA.
Cooper Medical School of Rowan University · USCooper University Hospital · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveOpioid use disorder is a cause of significant morbidity and mortality. In order to reverse opioid overdose as quickly as possible, many institutions and municipalities have encouraged people with no professional medical training to carry and administer naloxone. This study sought to provide preliminary data for research into the rates of adverse effects of naloxone when administered by bystanders compared to Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel, since this question has not been studied previously.

methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study performed at an urban, tertiary, academic medical center that operates its own EMS service. A consecutive sample of patients presenting to EMS with opioid overdose requiring naloxone was separated into two groups based on whether naloxone was administered by bystanders or by EMS personnel. Each group was analyzed to determine the incidence of four pre-specified adverse events.

resultsThere was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events between the bystander (19%) and EMS (16%) groups (OR = 1.23; 95% CI, 0.63 - 2.32; P = .499) in this small sample. Based on these initial results, a study would need a sample size of 6,188 in order to reach this conclusion with 80% power. Similarly, there were no significant differences in the rates of any of the individual adverse events. Secondary analysis of patients' demographics showed differences between the two groups which generate hypotheses for further investigation of disparities in naloxone administration.

conclusionsThis preliminary study provides foundational data for further investigation of naloxone administration by bystanders. Adverse events after the prehospital administration of naloxone are rare, and future studies will require large sample sizes. These preliminary data did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in adverse event rates when comparing naloxone administration by bystanders and EMS clinicians. This study provides data that will be useful for conducting further research on multiple facets of this topic.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesNaloxoneNarcotic AntagonistsAdultCohort StudiesDrug OverdoseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOpiate OverdoseOpioid-Related DisordersRetrospective StudiesNaloxoneNarcotic Antagonistsbystandernaloxoneopiateopioidoverdose

Identifiers

PMID38449098
PMCPMC11035918
OpenAlexW4392559834

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.