Drug-related Harm Research Articles

Patterns of socioeconomic marginalization and non-fatal overdose among people who use drugs: A gender-stratified repeated measures latent class analysis.

While marked gender-based differences in drug-related risk and harm between men women who use drugs have been characterized to some extent, the complex relationship between gendered socioeconomic conditions, overdose risk, and drug use patterns and behaviours remains underexplored. We conducted gender-stratified repeated measures latent class analyses (RMLCA) with data from two ongoing cohorts of people who use drugs in Vancouver, Canada to identify discrete subgroups based on socioeconomic exposures. Multivariable generalized estimating equations models weighted by the respective posterior membership probabilities were applied to estimate the associations between socioeconomic class membership and non-fatal overdose. Sub-analyses investigated whether these relationships were explained by drug use-related variables. Between June 2014 and March 2020, 1723 participants provided 12120 observations. At study baseline, 1074 (62.3%) were men and 649 (37.7%) were women. In RMLCA, five distinct profiles of socioeconomic exposures emerged for men, and four emerged for women. Classes were presented in ascending order of socioeconomic disadvantage (i.e., ranging from Class 1 [least disadvantage] to Class 4/Class 5 [most disadvantage]) and were primarily distinguished by variations in income, material and housing in/security, participation in illegal/informal income generation, and criminal justice involvement. In analyses adjusting for demographic characteristics, for both men and women, progressive increases in exposure to multiple dimensions of disadvantage were positively and independently associated with non-fatal overdose when compared to the least socioeconomically disadvantaged subgroup. Subsequent analyses revealed that systematic differences in drug use patterns and behaviours across categories of socioeconomic disadvantage largely accounted for these relationships. Addressing multiple forms of mutually reinforcing health inequities may offer additional opportunity to mitigate non-fatal overdose in men and women who use drugs.

Developing a comprehensive inventory to define harm reduction housing

BackgroundThe City of Boston has faced unprecedented challenges with substance use amidst changes to the illicit drug supply and increased visibility of homelessness. Among its responses, Boston developed six low threshold harm reduction housing (HRH) sites geared towards supporting the housing needs of people who use drugs (PWUD) and addressing health and safety concerns around geographically concentrated tent encampments. HRH sites are transitional supportive housing that adhere to a “housing first” approach where abstinence is not required and harm reduction services and supports are co-located. Despite the importance of HRH, the specific characteristics and operations of these sites are not well understood. This study sought to address this gap by cataloging the common features of Boston’s HRH sites to generate a comprehensive inventory tool for evaluating implementation of harm reduction strategies at transitional housing locations.MethodsWe collected data between June and September 2023 and included semi-structured qualitative interviews with HRH staff (n = 19), ethnographic observations and photos at six HRH sites. Candidate inventory components were derived through triangulation of the data. Two expert medical staff unaffiliated with data collection reviewed a draft inventory measuring awareness and utility of HRH inventory components. We then pilot tested the inventory with three HRH residents across two sites for readability and reliability. Awareness, frequency of use, and perceived helpfulness of key inventory items were further tested in a survey to 106 residents.ResultsHRH staff identified best practices, resources, and policies in HRH sites that were further contextualized with ethnographic field notes. Common to all were overdose prevention protocols, behavioral policies, security measures, and distribution of harm reduction supplies. The initial 44-item inventory of services, policies and site best practices was further refined with expert and participant feedback and application, then finalized to generate a 32-item inventory. Residents identified and valued harm reduction services; medical supports were highly valued but less utilized.ConclusionThe HRH inventory comprehensively assesses harm reduction provision and residents’ awareness and perceived helpfulness of HRH operational components in staying safe from drug-related harms. Characterizing the critical components of HRH through this tool will aid in standardizing the concept and practice of HRH for PWUD and may assist other cities in planning and implementing HRH.

Likelihood of using a harm reduction vending machine among rural people who inject drugs in Appalachian Kentucky.

Harm reduction vending machines (HRVMs) that dispense safe injection equipment and other supplies have operated globally for more than 30 years, yet few operate in the U.S., particularly in the rural epicenters of drug-related harms. This study explores likelihood of using HRVMs and correlates thereto among people who inject drugs in rural Appalachian Kentucky. Respondent-driven sampling and outreach were used to recruit participants who were age 18 or older, resided in an Appalachian Kentucky county, and had used opioids and/or injected drugs to get high in the past 30 days. Interviewer-administered questionnaires elicited data on behavioral and demographic characteristics and likelihood of using HRVMs. Analyses were restricted to participants who injected in the past 6 months (n = 259). Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (APRs) for correlates to likelihood of using HRVMs, controlling for lifetime use of brick-and-mortar syringe service programs. Overall, 57 % reported being likely to use HRVMs. Participants who lacked consistent access to transportation, engaged in receptive and distributive syringe sharing, experienced more lifetime overdoses, and had unsuccessfully attempted to access medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) reported being more likely to use HRVMs. Heroin and prescription opioid use were negatively associated with likelihood of HRVM use, as was experience of shame around drug use. Most people who inject drugs in this rural Appalachian sample were likely to use HRVMs, with interest being highest among those at highest risk for injection-related infections and overdose and who had faced difficulty accessing MOUD.

The implementation of safer drug consumption facilities in Scotland: a mixed methods needs assessment and feasibility study for the city of Edinburgh

BackgroundScotland currently has amongst the highest rates of drug-related deaths in Europe, leading to increased advocacy for safer drug consumption facilities (SDCFs) to be piloted in the country. In response to concerns about drug-related harms in Edinburgh, elected officials have considered introducing SDCFs in the city. This paper presents key findings from a feasibility study commissioned by City of Edinburgh Council to support these deliberations.MethodsUsing a multi-method needs assessment approach, we carried out a spatial and temporal analysis of drug-related data in Edinburgh including health, mortality, consumption, crime and service provision indicators; and 48 interviews including 22 people with lived/living experience (PWLE) of drug use in the city, five family members affected by drug-related harms, and 21 professional stakeholders likely to be involved in commissioning or delivering SDCFs. Data were collected using a convergent parallel design. We carried out a descriptive analysis of quantitative date and a thematic analysis of qualitative data. Quantitative data provides an overview of the local context in terms of recorded harms, service provision and consumption patterns as reported in prior surveys. Qualitative PWLE and families data captures the lived experiences of people who use drugs, and affected loved ones, within that local context, including perceived consumption trends, views on the practicality of SDCF provision, and hopes and anxieties regarding potential service provision. Professional stakeholders data provides insights into how people responsible for strategic planning and service delivery view the potential role of SDCF provision within the context described in the quantitative data.ResultsIn Edinburgh, drug-related harms and consumption patterns are dispersed across multiple locations, with some areas of higher concentration. Reported levels of opioid use, illicit benzodiazepine use and cocaine injecting are high. Qualitative interviews revealed strong support for the provision of SDCFs, and a preference for services that include peer delivery. However, PWLE also expressed concerns regarding safety and security, and professional stakeholders remained uncertain as to the prioritisation of facilities and possible opportunity costs in the face of restricted budgets.ConclusionThere is a strong case for the provision of SDCFs in Edinburgh. However, service design needs to reflect spatial distributions of consumption and harm, patterns of consumption by drug type, and expressed preferences for both informality and security among potential service users. Models of SDCF provision used elsewhere in Scotland would therefore need to be adapted to reflect such considerations. These findings may apply more broadly to potential SDCF provision in the UK and internationally, given changing patterns of use and harm.

Relational anonymity in reducing the harms of illicit drug use: accounts of users of dark web- and street-based services in Finland

BackgroundProtecting individual anonymity is a common practice in harm reduction (HR), as it can mitigate the fears that may prevent people from accessing services. Protecting anonymity usually means applying for services with a pseudonym. However, anonymity protection practices have diversified in current HR environments, for example, on the streets or in the Tor network, which relies on technology to guarantee exceptionally strong anonymity. Despite its importance, the individual’s need for anonymity when seeking help to reduce drug-related harm has been underexplored.MethodsThe research contexts included four street- and dark web-based HR services in Finland. The data consisted of service user interviews and naturally occurring conversations in the Tor network. We focused on service users’ accounts of their need for anonymity and applied the concept of relational anonymity, acknowledging that wider contextual relations intertwine with situational needs for anonymity. We asked: What kinds of needs for anonymity do service users express when discussing seeking help to reduce drug-related harm? How do service users account for their need for anonymity when seeking such help? To which kinds of contextual relations are these accounts attached?ResultsWe identified connections between the accounts of the need for anonymity and various contextual relations: (1) excusing the need for anonymity by referring to societal relations: blaming Finnish society for stigmatising attitudes and exclusionary practices; (2) excusing the need for anonymity by referring to service system relations: blaming the service system for the risk of negative consequences from recording the use of illicit drugs; (3) justifying and excusing the need for anonymity by referring to personal relations: appealing to personal situation, feelings and experiences.ConclusionsThe need for anonymity reflects problematic societal relations, in which the stigma towards drug use is strong. The service users’ accounts were motivated by rational actions to avoid possible sanctions and the perceived abuse of power in Finnish society and services, which the service users deemed to have various negative consequences in their lives. Societies should promote cultural atmospheres and information sharing practices where anonymity is not needed, but services that protect anonymity are crucial in the current societal conditions.

Multiple material need insecurities and severity of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic among women who use drugs

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the salience of material needs and financial precarity on mental health and distress. Women who use drugs (WWUD) experienced significant mental distress and multiple material need insecurities before the pandemic. However, research is limited on the nature of these insecurities during the pandemic despite both material scarcity and mental distress placing WWUD at greater risk of drug-related harms such as overdose. We aim to characterize material need insecurities and their associations with level of mental distress among a sample of WWUD in the United States during the COVID pandemic.MethodsN = 227 WWUD (i.e., non-medical use of opioids, crack or powdered cocaine at least three times in the past three months) were recruited in Baltimore, Maryland between August 2021-December 2022. We assessed participants’ challenges (i.e., none, minor, major challenge) in accessing five critical material needs during the pandemic: housing; food security; clean, potable water; transportation; and bathroom facilities. The number of major challenges was summed and dichotomized as minimal (0–1) challenges vs. multiple (2+) challenges. The outcome was severity of mental distress, measured by the Kessler-6 and categorized into no/mild, moderate, or severe distress based on validated cut-points. Multinomial logistic regression models were used to explore differences between mental distress severity groups.Results36% of the sample reported symptoms of moderate psychological distress and 39% severe distress. Nearly half (43%) reported multiple material need insecurities during COVID. Compared to those who reported minimal material need insecurities, participants with multiple insecurities were 3.25 (95% CI = 1.42–7.45) and 1.96 (95% CI = 0.97–3.95) times more likely to report severe psychological distress compared to no/mild distress or moderate distress, respectively. Unmet mental health needs increased risk of severe distress compared to no/mild 3.44 (95% CI = 1.48–7.97) or moderate 3.62 (95% CI = 1.75–7.49) distress.ConclusionsWWUD experienced a substantial burden of multiple material needs during the pandemic which were associated with elevated levels of mental distress. Results speak to the need to advance mental health equity by addressing access to material needs and mental healthcare for marginalized populations, particularly during health emergencies that threaten already-precarious social safety nets and healthcare infrastructure.

I Don’t Want to Shoot up the Meth Anymore: Pipe Distribution as a Harm Reduction Service for People Who Use Methamphetamine

Background Methamphetamine use is disproportionately high in rural settings, with rates increasing during the COVID-19 pandemic. While syringe service programs reduce disease transmission among people who inject drugs, limited research exists around the value of smoking equipment, specifically pipes, in minimizing harms associated with rural methamphetamine use. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with people who use methamphetamine in rural southern Illinois. Inclusion criteria involved methamphetamine use in the past 30 days. Interview guides explored attitudes and behaviors regarding pipe use practices and pipe access. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded. The data were analyzed for emergent themes using a sequential, deductive process. Results Nineteen participants, average age 37.1 (SD + 8.7), were interviewed. 53% were women, and 89% were white. All reported smoking methamphetamine, and 84% reported injecting. Participants reported engaging in smoking instead of injection to decrease wounds, pain, and infections. Smoking enabled some to use socially as opposed to alone, as was typically the case when they injected. Participants expressed interest in pipe distribution through a harm reduction agency. They shared that, were a harm reduction agency to distribute pipes, it would connect people to other services such as HIV testing, naloxone, and safer sex supplies. Conclusions Pipe distribution may function as a harm reduction strategy by decreasing injection and solitary drug use and linking patients to additional services. Given disproportionate methamphetamine use in rural regions, this intervention could specifically address drug-related harms that impact rural populations.

It’s Risky Out Where We Are: Exploring Intersectional Factors of Intentional Overdose Among People Who Use Drugs in Regional Queensland, Australia

Objective Globally, drug-related deaths impact both urban and non-urban areas. In Australia, regional areas face a concerning rise in drug-induced fatalities and suicides, exacerbated by structural factors like limited services and stigma. We sought to explore the experiences of people who use drugs (PWUDs) in regional Queensland to understand the structural vulnerabilities influencing drug-induced deaths. Methods The sample comprised 19 PWUDs from regional Queensland, Australia who had experienced overdose. Semi-structured interviews explored participants’ overdose experiences and contributing factors, focusing on regionality. Iterative coding was used to develop thematic categories. Results Participants highlighted the complex interplay of trauma, coping and drug use influencing overdose dynamics. Regional challenges, including limited access to support services, exacerbate risks for PWUDs. Structural inequalities perpetuate cycles of harm, with rural areas disproportionately affected. Participants emphasized the need for systemic changes to facilitate effective suicide prevention efforts, advocating for enhanced service engagement and legislative reforms. Conclusions These findings challenge systemic factors such as stigma and healthcare accessibility, which appear to be driving drug-related harm. Based on the findings, recommendations are made for systemic change, represented by comprehensive, community-driven interventions to address structural inequalities, and improve access to support services.

A novel, multi-component contingency management intervention in the context of a syndemic of drug-related harms in Glasgow, Scotland: First year of the 'WAND' initiative.

To address high levels of drug-related harms among people who inject drugs (PWID) in Glasgow, a novel contingency management intervention was developed to engage high-risk PWID with four harm reduction measures (known as the WAND initiative: Wound care, Assessment of injecting, Naloxone, and Dried blood-spot test). Our aims were to assess if WAND engaged and re-engaged high-risk PWID. Baseline data of WAND participants (n=831) from 1st Sept-2020 to 30th Aug-2021 were analysed. For those who took part in the first six months, extent of re-engagement was determined and, among those re-engaged, intervention coverage was compared between baseline and final engagement. Among those who first engaged in WAND from Sept 2020-Feb 2021 (n=546), 40% re-engaged by Aug 2021. Compared to those who engaged once (n=321), those who re-engaged (n=215) within one year had higher baseline prevalence of injecting risk behaviours such as injecting daily (56% vs 64%, p=0.032), injecting away from home (42% vs 52%, p=0.0179), injecting cocaine (56% vs 75%, p<0.001), having an SSTI (40% vs 60%, p<0.001), and been prescribed naloxone (57% vs 72%, p<0.001). For those who re-engaged six months to one year after initial engagement (n=107), there was a significant increase in having a BBV test in the last six months (61% to 81%, p=0.003) and carrying naloxone (22% to 32%, p=0.011). WAND was able to engage and re-engage large numbers of high-risk PWID with multiple harm reduction initiatives. These findings suggest contingency management could be a useful tool for harm reduction services.

Rural houselessness among people who use drugs in the United States: Results from the National Rural Opioid Initiative

BackgroundOver the last two decades, houselessness and drug-related epidemics both have expanded from urban to rural regions across the United States (US). However, our understanding of the relationship between rural houselessness, drug use, and drug-related harms has not kept pace. The current study addresses this gap by describing houselessness among a large cohort of people who use drugs (PWUD) from rural communities across 10 states. DesignPWUD were recruited using modified chain-referral sampling for a cross-sectional survey capturing houselessness in the prior six months, drug use, drug-related harms, stigma, health service access, and sociodemographic characteristics. Using bivariate logistic regressions, we assessed associations between houselessness and participant characteristics. We also compare site-specific houselessness prevalence to Housing and Urban Development Point-in-Time (PIT) estimates, which are based on counts of sheltered and unsheltered people experiencing houselessness on a single night. ResultsAmong 3000 PWUD, 53.7 % reported experiencing houselessness. Houselessness was associated with multiple drug-related behaviors that increase the risk of overdose and acquisition of bloodborne infections. Houselessness prevalence was comparable and exceeded PIT estimates for several sites, even though study participants constituted <1 % of each site’s adult population and were restricted to PWUD. ConclusionsOur findings highlight that houselessness – historically considered an urban issue – is a significant public health concern for PWUD in rural areas. This demonstrates that addressing drug-related HIV, hepatitis C, and overdose epidemics, among others, in the rural US will require the provision of stable housing and harm reduction services as a pathway to treatment and recovery.

Section 64a of the NDPS Act: Analysing the Immunity from Prosecution for Drug Addicts and Individuals Charged with Minor Offences

Section 64A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act of 1985 provides immunity from prosecution for drug users charged under Section 27 or involved in minor drug offences, as long as they willingly seek medical treatment for de-addiction at a government hospital. This provision signifies a shift towards prioritizing health rather than criminalization, emphasizing rehabilitative approaches over punitive measures. This paper examines the impact of Section 64A on reducing drug-related harm and the societal stigma of addiction, alongside its goals, challenges, and judicial interpretations. However, its effectiveness is compromised by inconsistent enforcement, insufficient rehabilitation resources, and widespread lack of awareness. Recommendations for enhancement involve elucidating unclear provisions of this regulation, fostering greater sensitivity among the public, law enforcement, and judicial officers, and broadening access to treatment. By bolstering India’s harm reduction approaches, substantial advancements can be achieved in both the legal framework and public health, tackling crucial health challenges and easing the burden on overcrowded prisons, thereby promoting a more equitable and efficient justice system.

“They talk about it like it's an overdose crisis when in fact it's basically genocide”: The experiences of Indigenous peoples who use illicit drugs in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside neighbourhood

Indigenous Peoples who use illicit drugs (IPWUID) are disproportionately represented among toxic drug poisoning deaths in Canada. These drug-related harms are framed by the historical and ongoing trauma related to settler colonialism and are acutely visible in Vancouver, Canada's Downtown Eastside - a low-income neighbourhood that is an epicenter of the drug poisoning crisis and characterized by entrenched poverty, substance use, violence, and homelessness. This study was undertaken to examine the experiences and perspectives of IPWUID in the Downtown Eastside regarding the drug poisoning crisis and the responsiveness of harm reduction programs within the context of settler colonialism. Indigenous-led qualitative interviews were conducted with 16 IPWUID recruited by Indigenous peer researchers. Indigenous ways of knowing were embedded throughout the entire research design to ensure research was culturally congruent. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically and interpreted by drawing on concepts of social violence and racial capitalism. Our analysis reviewed three key themes that centered the experiences of IPWUID in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside in relation to the drug poisoning crisis: (1) that the drug poisoning crisis is understood as a form of genocide toward Indigenous Peoples; (2) that the crisis is experienced within the context of pervasive distrust and adversarial relationships with police rooted in structurally racist experiences of place-based policing practices; and (3) that there is a desire for culturally-safe harm reduction care with Indigenous representation, cultural integration, and that addresses inequities and injustice stemming from colonialism and structural racism. Findings demonstrate how responses to the drug poisoning crisis among IPWUID need to respond to social and materials conditions perpetuated by colonialism and racial capitalism, while also centering IPWUID through the development and implementation of Indigenous-led and culturally safe harm reduction approaches.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Opioid Substitution Therapy in Penal Institutions: A Qualitative Study from Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany

BACKGROUND: Opioid use is prevalent throughout prison populations worldwide. To date, opioid substitution treatment (OST) is considered as one of the most effective treatments for reducing drug-related harm associated with opioid dependence. Yet, large gaps prevail in the access and availability of OST in detention facilities in Germany. We investigated the views and attitudes of health professionals working in prisons in the federal state of Baden-Wuerttemberg towards OST and identified barriers and facilitators to the implementation of prison-based OST.METHODS: We conducted semi-structured expert interviews with nine physicians and one psychologist working in prisons in Baden-Wuerttemberg. The data was analyzed in MAXQDA using a qualitative content analysis approach. RESULTS: A majority of study participants (90%) held positive attitudes towards OST. Our findings suggest that concerns about OST medication diversion and the co-consumption of illegal drugs, insufficient staff capacity, and difficulties in ensuring continuity of care post-release posed barriers to prison-based OST. Additionally, the prison setting, an adequate personnel infrastructure, and the availability of technical equipment were perceived as facilitating the implementation of OST. The participants highlighted the need for an increase in medical personnel capacities and for improved transition management between intra- and extramural treatment settings. CONCLUSIONS: To improve drug using prisoners’ health, intramural OST needs to be adapted more to the particularities of­­ the prison setting such as offering less-divertible medication options and ensuring continuity of care after imprisonment. Research is needed on the acceptance of new OST medications among incarcerated populations and actionable treatment approaches.

"We're Not Gonna Aid You in Shooting Up": Stigma's Relationship to Harm Reduction in People Who Inject Drugs.

Harm reduction, when applied to drug use, prioritizes improving patient-centered health outcomes and reducing drug-related harm. In order for harm reduction strategies to be adopted by people who inject drugs (PWID), they need to be promoted, accessible, and accepted in that population and the community-at-large. While PWID face stigma at multiple levels, less is known about how stigma influences uptake and acceptance of harm reduction services and strategies among PWID. We aim to characterize the stigmatizing experiences PWID have had related to harm reduction and the role of stigma in influencing their acceptance and adoption of harm reduction services and strategies. A qualitative study using in-person, semi-structured interviews. We recruited hospitalized participants, age 18 and over, with a history of injection drug use. We developed an interview guide asking about various aspects of stigma and participants' experiences with naloxone, syringe service programs, fentanyl test strips, HIV and hepatitis C testing, and any other harm reduction strategies. Key themes were generated using a thematic analysis. We reached thematic saturation at 16 participants. PWID reported multi-level stigma related to harm reduction from themselves, the public, the healthcare system, and the legal and carceral systems. Themes were grouped into four main categories: internalized, interpersonal, intervention, and structural stigma. Stigma across all of these domains negatively impacted the ability of PWID to access harm reduction resources. Positive, non-stigmatizing experiences from others, such as syringe service programs and peer navigators, countered historically negative experiences and promoted greater education and comfort about using harm reduction resources among PWID. To expand the reach of harm reduction services, it is critical to develop interventions that can reduce the stigma against PWID and harm reduction.

Use of fentanyl test strips by people who inject drugs: Baseline findings from the South Atlantic Fentanyl Test Strip Study (SAFTSS)

BackgroundResearch published during the early fentanyl period exposed a growing concern of unwitting fentanyl exposure and a general willingness to use fentanyl test strips (FTS). A paucity of FTS studies over the last several years has restricted our ability to understand FTS use in the late fentanyl era. The South Atlantic FTS Study (SAFTSS) was established to investigate contemporaneous changes in FTS use and drug use behavior among a rural cohort of PWID. MethodsBetween June 2021 and March 2022, a total of 541 PWID completed an in-person survey. Baseline survey questions included demographics, socioeconomic characteristics, and drugs used. FTS questions covered lifetime use, past 6-months, and past 30-day use and included reasons for using FTS, levels of access, and confidence testing illicit opioids and stimulants. Multivariable analyses examined significant baseline correlates of lifetime and 30-day FTS use. ResultsOverall, more than half (58%; N=315) used FTS in their lifetime. Among lifetime FTS users, almost half (47%) used FTS in the past 6 months and 30% in the past 30 days, with an average of 13 months from last FTS use and the baseline survey. The most common reason for not using FTS was “not having them with me when I use drugs.” Less frequent reasons were “I already know it's fentanyl” followed by “FTS take too much time to use.” Among past 30-day FTS users, 74% used FTS on heroin, 55% on methamphetamine, and 33% on fentanyl. Consumer confidence using FTS was higher with illicit opioids (66%) but lower for methamphetamine (43%). In both the lifetime and past 30-day models, PWID with FTS use were more likely than non-users to have witnessed an overdose in the past six months (lifetime aOR = 2.85, p<.001; 30-day aOR=2.57, p<.01). Virtually no differences in drug use behaviors were found when comparing past 30-days FTS use to no FTS use. Women (aOR=1.68, p<.05) and non-white PWID (aOR=2.43, p<.05) were more likely than men and white PWID to have used FTS. ConclusionsDeclines in FTS use are consistent with what syringe services programs have been signaling for years. Needs assessments to gauge interest in FTS before scaling up can help ensure funding better spent on naloxone and syringes is not allocated to idle FTS. Increased FTS among women and racial minorities presents opportunities for tailored interventions. Recognizing trauma associated with witnessing overdoses as a growing component of the opioid epidemic is a critical first step toward addressing the full spectrum of drug-related harm.

Clinical Outcomes of Benzodiazepine Prescribing for People Receiving Opioid Agonist Treatment: A Systematic Review of the Evidence.

Many countries are experiencing an increased use of unregulated benzodiazepines in combination with opioids and other drugs, which contributes to drug-related harm. This descriptive review identifies and synthesises the outcomes of studies co-prescribing benzodiazepines and opioids. A systematic review was undertaken in Medline, CINAHL, PsychInfo, Embase, and the Cochrane databases covering publications from 1 January 1991 to 18 November 2021. Inclusion criteria were peer reviewed, English language studies of adults prescribed opioid agonist treatment (OAT) and a concurrent benzodiazepine, and reporting outcome data. Of the 4370 titles screened, 18 papers were included. The main outcomes identified covered all-cause mortality (ACM) (n = 5); overdose death (n = 3); retention in treatment (n = 7); and hospitalisation/emergency department encounters (n = 2). Other outcomes included QTc interval, cognitive function, illicit drug use, and mental health. The prescription of benzodiazepines alongside OAT increased the ACM by 75-90%, while evidence on overdose death was less robust but indicative of increased risk (40-334%). There was an indicative positive effect on treatment retention, with increased retention in those prescribed a benzodiazepine with OAT compared to those not prescribed or taking non-prescribed benzodiazepines. In conclusion, methodologically robust epidemiological studies found increased ACM and overdose death but possibly improved retention. However confounders (e.g., psychiatric comorbidity) exist, so a trial is recommended.

Community-Driven Research with People Who Use Drugs: A Virtual Project During Multiple Epidemics

Sociological approaches to digital and community-engaged research experienced significant innovation in recent years. This article examines developing and implementing a primarily virtual community-driven research (CDR) project with the National Survivors Union, the American national drug-users union, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Relationships between researchers and directly impacted people, such as people who use drugs, face many barriers. These issues were exacerbated during COVID-19 when in-person research decreased while drug-related harms increased. In response, this project modified the CDR model for drug-use research. The CDR model is particularly beneficial for studies with marginalized populations who may mistrust researchers. In CDR, impacted community members are fundamental project drivers. This project’s data are based on 29 months of weekly group meetings in National Survivors Union online spaces, group and individual text conversations, phone calls, and shared-document group work. The project co-developed methods for CDR with directly impacted people, including community-initiated research questions, low-threshold methods, collaborative writing strategies, coauthorship practices foregrounding directly impacted perspectives, and multiple dissemination forms. Modified CDR expands sociological methods for digital research, citizen science, and community-engaged research with vulnerable, criminalized groups. This approach may aid inclusive, innovative sociological scholarship and effective public health policy for reducing morbidity and mortality during multiple crises.

Opportunities and challenges for implementing drug checking services in British Columbia, Canada: A qualitative study

BackgroundAmidst the ongoing drug poisoning crisis across North America, drug checking services (DCS) are increasingly being implemented as an intervention intended to reduce drug-related harms. This study sought to identify key opportunities and challenges influencing the implementation of DCS in British Columbia (BC), Canada. MethodsBetween January 2020 and July 2021, semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 21 individuals involved in the implementation of DCS across BC (i.e., policymakers, health authority personnel, community organization representatives and service providers). The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to guide coding and analysis of the interviews. ResultsBy bringing in a wealth of knowledge about community needs and concerns, in addition to a passion and energy for social justice and health equity, community members and organizations with a dedication for harm reduction played a critical role in the successful implementation of DCS in BC. Other significant facilitators to implementation included the preventive benefits of DCS that made the intervention compelling to policy influencers and decision makers, the provincial public health emergency regarding overdose that shifted the regulatory environment of DCS, the adaptability of DCS to meet concerns and needs in various contexts, including via ongoing processes of reflection and evaluation. Barriers to implementation included criminalization and stigmatization of drug use and people who use drugs and lack of funding for community-led implementation actions. ConclusionsAlongside structural reforms that address the underlying contextual factors that influence implementation (e.g., decriminalization of drugs, increased funding for DCS), centering community expertise throughout implementation is critical to the success of DCS. Our findings provide important insights into how BC can successfully implement systems-level harm reduction interventions and offer insights for other jurisdictions in their implementation of DCS.

Harm reduction-focused behavioral activation for people who inject drugs: Mixed methods outcomes from a pilot open trial

IntroductionPeople who inject drugs (PWID) experience high rates of mental health problems and drug-related harms. Harm reduction-focused interventions aim to reduce harms associated with drug use and are an important approach for engaging people who are not seeking traditional abstinence-focused treatment. Yet, few studies to date have examined the effectiveness of harm reduction psychosocial treatment for drug use. We evaluated the outcomes of a harm reduction-focused behavioral activation (BA) intervention from pretreatment to a 1-month follow-up. MethodsA total of N = 23 PWID (65.2 % White; 52.2 % women; mean age 35.4 ± 7.8 years) were recruited from syringe services programs and n = 19 received the intervention via teletherapy. Assessment of study outcome measures occurred at pre- and posttreatment and a one-month follow-up. ResultsResults reflected post-intervention increases in behavioral activation and readiness to change drug use, as well as decreases in substance use, depression, and HIV risk behaviors. There were mixed outcomes on substance-related problems with increases at follow-up, possibly reflecting increased problem recognition. ConclusionsThese results suggest initial promise for the harm reduction-focused treatment. Additional research with randomized designs and larger sample sizes is needed, and more intensive treatment may be required to support sustained treatment gains in this population.

Drug-Drug Interactions in Hospitalized Urological Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Exposure to potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) can be a notable source of avoidable drug-related harm that requires adequate management to prevent medical errors. We aimed to evaluate pDDIs and associated factors in hospitalized urological patients on admission, during hospitalization, and on discharge. A retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Clinic of Urology of the University Clinical Centre Kragujevac, Serbia. To detect pDDIs, we used Lexicomp, which categorizes pDDIs as follows: X (avoid combination), D (consider therapy modification), C (monitor therapy), B (no action needed), and A (no known interaction). Multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with the number of pDDIs. More than half of the 220 included patients had at least one pDDI on admission and discharge (57.3% and 63.6%, respectively), whereas 95.0% had at least one pDDI during hospitalization. The total number and number of X, D, C, and B categories of pDDIs were the highest during hospitalization and the lowest on admission. Duration of hospitalization, arrhythmias, dementia, renal failure, cancer, surgery during hospitalization, number of prescribed drugs, and various pharmacological drug classes were risk factors for a higher number of pDDIs, while age, ischemic heart disease, hypertension, and development of infection during hospitalization were protective factors in at least one of the stages. The impact of renal colic depended on the stage and category of pDDI. More than half of the urological patients were exposed to at least one pDDIs at all stages. Medical professionals should regularly screen for pDDIs, particularly in patients with risk factors.