Evidence Hub

Early Results of Implementing Rapid Methadone Titration for Hospitalized Patients: A Case Series

Marlene Martin, T. Baisey, Sasha Skinner, Leslie Ly, Kristin Slown, Kristin Harter, O. Nguyen, Scott Steiger et al.

Journal of general internal medicine, 2025

47 participants · 11 citations

Abstract

With the increase in illicit fentanyl use in the USA, hospitals face challenges managing opioid withdrawal and opioid use disorder (OUD). To improve opioid withdrawal and OUD treatment among hospitalized patients with daily fentanyl use, we developed a rapid methadone titration (RMT) protocol. We describe development, implementation, and outcomes during the first 12 weeks. We analyzed electronic health record data of hospitalizations seen by the Addiction Consult Team (ACT) for methadone initiation between 9/11/23 and 12/3/23. Adults aged 18–64 reporting daily fentanyl use, desiring methadone, and without end-stage organ damage or critical illness were RMT eligible. We characterized patients who received RMT, abstracting demographic and clinical characteristics, adverse events graded by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), and methadone and additional full agonist opioid (FAO) dosing. Our primary outcome was adverse events. Secondary outcomes included median time to 100 mg of methadone, FAO dosing, and self-directed discharge. ACT assessed 55 hospitalizations representing 47 patients for RMT eligibility. Among these, 19 (34.5%) hospitalizations representing 17 patients were eligible for and received RMT. Four (21.2%) hospitalizations that received RMT had sedation events, and all were mild or moderate grade by CTCAE. Hospitalizations achieved a median methadone dose of 100 mg by day 6, with FAO doses peaking on day 5. One (5.3%) hospitalization had a…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 47 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free