Supervised Injection Facility Research Articles

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE LOCAL COMMUNITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA AND SUPERVISED INJECTION FACILITIES: A SHORT LITERATURE REVIEW

The establishment of supervised injection facilities has been a journey fraught with challenges and difficulties, due to the cultural beliefs regarding harm reduction and drug users in British Columbia during the 1990s. It was evident that scientific evidence was not enough to convince authorities that supervised injection facilities would benefit drug users and the community. Cultural intervention was required to change the government’s opinion regarding this issue. For years, citizens and organizations fought for supervised injection facilities, and their efforts have contributed greatly to the establishment of these sites. This paper argues that the creation of supervised injection facilities can be attributed to the protests and actions executed by the community in British Columbia, as well as exploring the relationship between the local community and the establishment and preservation of supervised injection facilities.

“Make yourself un-NIMBY-able”: stakeholder perspectives on strategies to mobilize public and political support for overdose prevention centers in the United States of America

BackgroundOverdose prevention centers (OPCs), also known as supervised injection facilities and safe consumption sites, are evidenced-based interventions for preventing overdose deaths and drug-related morbidities. The pathways to legalizing OPCs in the USA have confronted multiple social, political, and legal obstacles. We conducted a multi-site, qualitative study to explore heterogeneities in these pathways in four jurisdictions, as well as to understand stakeholder perspectives on valuable strategies for galvanizing political and public support for OPCs.MethodsFrom July 2022 to February 2023, we conducted 17 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with OPC policymakers, service providers, advocates, and researchers from California, New York City, Philadelphia, and Rhode Island, where efforts have been undertaken to authorize OPCs. Using inductive thematic analysis, we identified and compared contextually relevant, salient approaches for increasing support for OPCs.ResultsParticipants described several strategies clustering around five distinct domains: (1) embedding OPC advocacy into broader overdose prevention coalitions to shape policy dialogs; (2) building rapport with a plurality of powerbrokers (e.g., lawmakers, health departments, law enforcement) who could amplify the impact of OPC advocacy; (3) emphasizing specific benefits of OPCs to different audiences in different contexts; (4) leveraging relationships with frontline workers (e.g., emergency medicine and substance use treatment providers) to challenge OPC opposition, including ‘NIMBY-ism,’ and misinformation; and (5) prioritizing transparency in OPC decision-making to foster public trust.ConclusionWhile tailored to the specific socio-political context of each locality, multiple OPC advocacy strategies have been deployed to cultivate support for OPCs in the USA. Advocacy strategies that are multi-pronged, leverage partnerships with stakeholders at multiple levels, and tailor communications to different audiences and settings could yield the greatest impact in increasing support for, and diffusing opposition to, future OPC implementation.

Virtual overdose monitoring services/mobile overdose response services: estimated number of potentially averted drug poisoning fatality events by various telephone and digital-based overdose prevention/harm reduction services in North America.

Virtual overdose monitoring services or Mobile Overdose Response Services (MORS) are novel virtual harm reduction tools which have gained popularity as an adjunct public health intervention especially for those who cannot access harm reduction resources through traditional means. At this time, relatively little is known about their ability to reach their goals of reducing overdose mortality. Our study aims to summarize the potential effectiveness of various MORS collectively to avoid potential mortality from a drug poisoning event/drug overdose. Utilizing publicly available data from various MORS alongside some usage data provided by these services for this study, we model the impact of these services on fatal drug poisoning/overdose. In order to calculate the number of deaths averted, a Monte Carlo simulation was used to calculate point estimates with 95% confidence for fatal drug poisonings/drug overdose potentially averted through the utilization of various MORS. From the earliest mention of MORS in current literature (2019), a total of 299 drug poisoning/overdose events occurred across these services. Noting the broad range of mortality statistics available in current literature, these technologies have potentially prevented between 33 to 243 deaths. Our Monte Carlo estimates 135 potentially fatal drug poisonings/overdose were overall averted by the various MORS. While there is yet to be a robust data set proving the effectiveness of these services, conservative estimates show that MORS can reduce mortality associated with substance use and therefore should be considered as a viable harm-reduction strategy but as an adjunct to more established harm reduction services such as supervised consumption sites and supervised injection facilities. While more research is needed, clinicians and practitioners should consider the suggestion of these tools for patients who use drugs.

The impact of COVID-19 public health measures on attendance and overdose at supervised injecting facilities in Australia

ObjectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic disrupted service provision of harm reduction and drug treatment services for people who inject drugs in many countries. The two supervised injecting facilities (SIFs) in Sydney and Melbourne were differentially impacted by the pandemic, requiring local procedural changes in each service. We aimed to examine the impact of pandemic responses (including restrictions on movement, known as ‘lockdowns’) on service use and key parameters such as client reports of drug injected and recorded overdose rates. Study designTime series analysis of weekly client visits and monthly overdoses occurring at each service. MethodsAdministrative client data from the two SIFs (Sydney data from 1 January 2018 to 30 April 2022; Melbourne data from 1 July 2018 to 30 April 2022) were examined using interrupted time series analyses with lockdown dates in each state entered as interruption terms. We analysed weekly SIF visits overall and by drug type, and monthly rates of opioid overdose at each service. ResultsLockdowns resulted in decreased visits to both services. The number of weekly client visits decreased during the first national lockdown for both the Sydney (trend change = −57.9; 95% CI [−109.4, −6.4]) and Melbourne SIF (near sig trend change = −54.8 [−110.8, 1.05]). Trends in visit numbers increased after lockdowns were lifted in each city; however, visits in Sydney have not returned to the numbers recorded prior to the pandemic. Visits to the Melbourne SIF related to heroin use declined at each lockdown (trend 1 = −42.7 [−81.5, −3.9]; trend 2 = −56.1 [−94.6, −17.7]; trend 3 = −33.8 [−67.4, −0.2]); heroin visits to the Sydney SIF declined during the first lockdown and remained low (trend = −55.6 [−82.8, −28.3]). Methamphetamine visits to the Sydney SIF fluctuated, surpassing heroin visits at several timepoints. Rates of monthly opioid overdoses at both services declined immediately following the start of the first lockdown (Sydney = −16.6 [−26.1, −6.8]; Melbourne = −6.4 [−8.7, −4.1]), with increasing trends recorded at the end of the final lockdown in each jurisdiction (Sydney = 2.8 [0.6, 5.0]; Melbourne = 1.3 [0.72, 3.2]). ConclusionsPublic health restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with reduced client visits to, and overdoses in, Australian SIFs. Variations were noted in the drugs injected, likely reflecting changes in local drug markets. Shifts to other drugs during these periods were evident: methamphetamine in Sydney; co-injection of heroin and diphenhydramine in Melbourne.

First Responder Attitudes Regarding Working Near a Supervised Injection Facility: Relationship to Burnout, Secondary Traumatic Stress, and Compassion Satisfaction.

Emergency responders are the most frequent overdose responders, however, little is known about the impact of supervised injection facility (SIF) location on first responders. The purpose of this study was to determine whether firefighter/paramedic attitudes about being stationed near an SIF were related to burnout, secondary traumatic stress, and compassion satisfaction. Firefighter/paramedics from Vancouver Fire and Rescue Services (n = 54) completed an online survey. General linear models were used to assess differences in burnout, secondary traumatic stress, and compassion satisfaction based on attitudes regarding being stationed near an SIF while controlling for occupational stress. Firefighters with negative attitudes regarding station placement near an SIF experienced more burnout compared with those with neutral/mixed attitudes and less compassion satisfaction compared with those with positive attitudes. There were no differences between those with positive and neutral/mixed attitudes. These findings have implications for education and training of emergency responders stationed near SIFs. They also highlight the need for more research into the effects of and possible clinical opportunities needed to support first responders' work near an SIF. While these findings represent early exploratory evidence, increased burnout and reduced compassion satisfaction may be common reactions among first responders who experience negative attitudes toward SIFs. Prevention efforts could incorporate programs to enhance health and well-being of first responders and education regarding substance use and harm reduction, while workforce surveillance for signs of distress or burnout could be implemented to trigger additional mental health services and interventions. while policymakers should remain aware of SIF-related impacts on all stakeholders, including first responders.

Barriers and facilitators of naloxone and safe injection facility interventions to reduce opioid drug-related deaths: A qualitative analysis.

Opioid drug-related deaths continue to be a significant public health concern in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI). While both regions have implemented naloxone to reduce drug related deaths, there remains a gap in the implementation of a supervised injection facility (SIF). This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing naloxone and a SIF to reduce opioid drug-related deaths in ROI and NI. Semi-structured interviews (n=23) were conducted in ROI and NI with experts by experience (n=8), staff from low threshold services (n=9), and individuals involved in policy making (n= 6). Data were analyzed using coding reliability Thematic Analysis and were informed by the Risk Environmental Framework. The findings illustrated that stigma within the media, health centers, and the community was a significant barrier to naloxone distribution and SIF implementation. Policing and community intimidation were reported to hinder naloxone carriage in both the ROI and NI, while threats of paramilitary violence towards people who use drugs were unique to NI. Municipal government delays and policy maker apathy were reported to hinder SIF implementation in the ROI. Participants suggested peer-to-peer naloxone delivery and amending legislation to facilitate non-prescription naloxone would increase naloxone uptake. Participants recommended using webinars, Town Halls, and a Citizens' Assembly as tools to advocate for SIF implementation. Local and regional stigma reduction campaigns are needed in conjunction with policy changes to advance naloxone and a SIF. Tailoring stigma campaigns to incorporate the lived experience of people who use drugs, their family members, and the general community can aid in educating the public and change negative perceptions. This study highlights the need for ongoing efforts to reduce stigma and increase accessibility to evidence-based interventions to address opioid drug-related deaths in the ROI, NI, and internationally.

Monitoring for fentanyl within Australian supervised injecting facilities: Findings from feasibility testing of novel methods and collaborative workshops

Australia is yet to see widespread fentanyl-contaminated heroin, despite the established presence of fentanyl in other countries. International mortality trends alongside a local cluster of fentanyl-related deaths prompted interest in developing methods to monitor for fentanyl and other potentially harmful novel psychoactive substances (NPS) in Australia. We tested novel methods to monitor for fentanyl and other NPS. From 2017-2021, clients from supervised injecting facilities (SIFs) in Melbourne and Sydney, Australia, contributed urine screens (UDS) with BTNX Rapid Response™ fentanyl test strips (FTS) paired with surveys, and injecting equipment associated with opioid overdoses for laboratory analysis. A single site piloted drug checking using FTS with laboratory confirmation. Two workshops were conducted with SIF staff, content experts and people with lived experience to determine how results can inform practices within SIFs. Of the 911 UDS with FTS conducted, less than 1% (n=8) yielded positive results that were not explained by self-reported pharmaceutical fentanyl use, with two laboratory confirmed fentanyl positive results. Injecting equipment from 59 overdoses was tested and neither fentanyl nor other NPS were identified. Drug checking with FTS (n=34) indicated the presence of fentanyl on three tests. Two specimens were subsequently sent for laboratory testing and classified as false positives as the presence of fentanyl was not confirmed. Workshop participants (n=21) felt routine monitoring with FTS currently had limited value. A process for using pre-defined signals to trigger surveillance was developed. The high false positive rates with FTS, relative to the small number of positive results and potential for them to undermine confidence in FTS emphasised the need for confirmatory testing. The role of routine surveillance was unclear within the current low-fentanyl context, however, a process was developed to upscale testing should signals of increased fentanyl prevalence in the Australian heroin market emerge.

The Two Opioid Crises Problems, Causes, and Potential Solutions: An Analytic Review

Introduction: The United States currently faces two opioid crises, an evolved crisis currently manifesting as widespread abuse of illicit opioids, and a crisis in pain management largely manufactured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2016 Guideline. Our goal in this paper is to identify root causes, trace the trajectory of forces unleashed over time, and define potential solutions to these crises. Methods: Analytic review of the scientific, socioeconomic, and historical literature. Results: The evolved crisis reflects a socioeconomic rift in American society that began in the 1970s and has resulted in disintegration of lives and rising levels of desperation, particularly among the under-educated, rendering them susceptible to the lure of illicit opioids. Present manifestations of that crisis reflect a complex series of events starting with a consensus in the late1990s that opioids were fully acceptable in the management of chronic noncancer pain. This was followed by vast opportunism by pill mills, drug distributors, and the manufacturers that supplied them; aggressive actions by state governments to rein in the pill mills; and ultimately, the development of an enormous black market in heroin and fentanyl. The manufactured crisis reflects intrusion into the medical care of patients in chronic pain by the Centers for Disease Control that had been politicized decades earlier and that, in 2016, issued a Guideline that reflected serious mis-construal of the causes of the opioid crisis. We trace this history and review the literature on treatment of addiction, including medically assisted therapy, treatment of depression, psychosocial interventions, 12-step programs, programs that seek to address the causes of desperation, supervised injection facilities, decriminalization, legalization, and the impact of the comprehensive approach taken by Portugal. We also analyze the problems affecting the Centers for Disease Control that led to the publication of its ill-advised 2016 Guideline. Discussion: We conclude that many approaches currently being taken to treat addiction are well supported by scientific evidence but that the overall efficacy of treatment programs is not optimal and only a small fraction of all patients actually enter such programs. We also conclude that the Centers for Disease Control should have no future role in the regulation of patient care.

Public injecting and its association with mental health and other drug-related outcomes among people who inject drugs in Iran

BackgroundInjecting in public places may increase the risk of drug and health-related harms among people who inject drugs (PWID). We examined the prevalence of public injecting and associations with non–fatal overdose, needle/syringe sharing, sexual health, and mental health among PWID in Iran. MethodsUsing respondent-driven sampling, we recruited 2684 PWID from 11 major cities between July 2019 and March 2020. We defined public injecting as injecting primarily in public places, such as streets, parks, or abandoned buildings. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed public injecting and its associated factors, as well as the association of public injecting with certain health outcomes. ResultsOf 2388 respondents, 69.6 % reported public injecting in the previous year. Self-identifying as men (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 4.21; 95 % confidence intervals [95 % CI]: 2.31, 7.65), homelessness (aOR = 6.81; 95 % CI: 5.10, 9.10), high injection frequency (aOR = 1.58; 95 % CI: 1.03, 2.44), and free needle/syringe uptake (aOR = 1.47; 95 % CI: 1.04, 2.07) were significantly associated with public injecting. Compared to PWID who primarily inject in non–public places, PWID who mostly used public places had significantly greater odds of reporting non–fatal overdose (aOR = 2.02; 95 % CI: 1.01, 4.02), needle/syringe sharing (aOR = 1.77; 95 % CI: 1.08, 2.90), unsafe sexual practices with casual sexual partners (aOR = 2.16; 95 % CI: 1.03, 4.55), suicidal ideation (aOR = 1.50; 95 % CI: 1.02, 2.21), and self-harm (aOR = 1.78; 95 % CI: 1.24, 2.54) in the last three months. ConclusionThese results suggest the potential utility of a safer injecting environment to mitigate the multiple harms associated with public injecting in Iran. Optimizing health and well-being of PWID necessitates integrating supervised injection facilities into the current harm reduction programs and services in Iran. Future studies should also consider the experiences of additional mental health harms associated with public injecting when exploring adverse health outcomes among PWID.

Mobilising a counterhegemonic idea: Empathy, evidence, and experience in the campaign for a Supervised Drug Injecting Facility (SIF) in Dublin, Ireland

AbstractUsing the case of the campaign to establish a Supervised Injecting Facility (SIF) for people who use illicit drugs in Dublin, Ireland, this paper makes three related contributions to contemporary literatures. First, by detailing the history of the campaign and paying particular attention to the ways it was influenced by learning from models elsewhere in the world, the paper adds a spatial perspective to research on the intersections of public health and politics. Second, the paper addresses the policy mobilities literature's minimal engagement with the role of counterhegemonic ideas and national states in shaping inter‐local policy circulations. It provides detailed empirical analysis of the influence of counterhegemonic ideas and how activists reference those ideas through appeals to empathy, expert evidence, and experience as they build coalitions to influence formal state institutions, including the legal system and the national government. This discussion supports a call for engagement between policy mobilities and counterhegemonic social movement literatures. Third, the paper addresses ongoing discussions of ‘failure’ in policy‐making by arguing for a critical, contextual approach to the spatialities and temporalities of attempts to change entrenched policy and regulatory models. The case study is based on one author's direct involvement in the campaign for a SIF and on semi‐structured research interviews with 12 key actors conducted since 2015. The research also involved an analysis of relevant documentary materials spanning the period 2012–2021 and both authors' participation in a drug policy forum in Dublin in January 2017, involving local and international actors.

Acceptability of supervised injection facilities among persons who inject drugs in upstate New York

BackgroundSupervised injection facilities (SIFs) provide spaces where persons who inject drugs (PWID) can inject under medical supervision and access harm reduction services. Though SIFs are not currently sanctioned in most of the US, such facilities are being considered for approval in several Upstate New York communities. No data exist from PWID in Upstate New York, and little from outside major US urban centers, on willingness to use SIFs and associated factors.MethodsThis analysis included 285 PWID (mean age = 38.7; 57.7% male; 72.3% non-Hispanic white) recruited for a study on hepatitis C prevalence among PWID in Upstate New York, where participants were recruited from syringe exchange programs (n = 80) and able to refer other PWID from their injection networks (n = 223). Participants completed an electronic questionnaire that included a brief description of SIFs and assessed willingness to use SIFs. We compared sociodemographic characteristics, drug use/harm reduction history, healthcare experience, and stigma between participants who were willing vs. unwilling to use such programs.ResultsOverall, 67.4% were willing to use SIFs, 18.3% unwilling, and 14.4% unsure. Among those reporting being willing or unwilling, we found higher willingness among those who were currently homeless (91.8% vs. 74.6%; p = 0.004), who had interacted with police in the past 12 months (85.7% vs. 74.5%; p = 0.04), and who were refused service within a healthcare setting (100% vs. 77.1%; p = 0.03).ConclusionOur results support SIF acceptability in several Upstate New York PWID communities, particularly among those reporting feelings of marginalization. A large proportion reported being unsure about usage of SIFs, suggesting room for educating PWID on the potential benefits of this service. Our results support SIF acceptability in Upstate New York and may inform programming for underserved PWID, should SIFs become available.

Beyond co-production: The construction of drug checking knowledge in a Canadian supervised injection facility

Drug-checking is an ensemble of different harm reduction techniques providing people the ability to test illegally purchased drugs for strength, the presence of particular substances, and possible adulterants. Drug-checking research has primarily focused on nightlife and festival communities of people who use drugs and has overlooked how it functions as a knowledge forming process, particularly by people whose drug use is more stigmatized. The implementation of Fourier-Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) in Vancouver, Canada's Downtown Eastside in response to the overdose crisis has made it possible for people who use drugs to receive information about the drugs that they are consuming. Using insights developed from the ‘ontological turn’ and approaches to co-production from public health and science and technology studies, we explore the multiple relations that come to produce and contest drug-checking knowledge in this setting. We look at how knowledge is produced by and for people who use drugs, including people who use drugs operating the FTIR. Using rapid ethnographic assessment and semi-structured interviews, participants were recruited from a low-barrier supervised injection facility to explore their experience of drug-checking. Data were coded in NVivo 12 using an initial coding scheme, as well as an iterative coding scheme as the data were explored. We find that the traditional demarcation between lay and expert, or peer and professional, which co-production idioms often rely on, creates barriers to seeing the different knowledge formations of drug-checking knowledge, and instead offer up a new idiom, trans-production, to explore how knowledge and harm reduction services are mutually enacted.

Infrequent detection of unintentional fentanyl use via urinalysis among people who regularly inject opioids in Sydney and Melbourne, Australia.

Background and aimThe current phase of the North American ‘opioid crisis’ is characterised by illicit fentanyl use; however, the presence of illicit fentanyl in Australia is unknown. This study aimed to monitor unintentional fentanyl consumption in Australia.DesignRapid urine drug screens (UDS) paired with surveys conducted within supervised injecting facilities (SIFs) and confirmatory laboratory testing.SettingSydney and Melbourne, Australia.ParticipantsClients who used heroin within the past 2 days (n = 911 tests, 2017–2021). Participants were demographically similar to the overall client base (median age 43, 72% male).MeasurementsUDS were conducted using BTNX Rapid Response fentanyl urine strip tests with cross‐reactivity to numerous fentanyl analogues. Positive urine samples were analysed using liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. Surveys covered past 3 day drug use and lifetime report of fentanyl in heroin.FindingsTwo percent of participants reported intentional use of fentanyl, mostly through fentanyl patches. Of the 911 rapid UDS conducted, 17 (1.9%) yielded positive results. Eight of these (all from Melbourne) were not explained by survey‐reported fentanyl use in the past 3 days. Of these 8 unexplained positives, confirmatory laboratory analysis was conducted on 6, with 4 deemed to be false positives, and 2 confirmed for the presence of fentanyl. This represents the first confirmation of unintended use of fentanyl type substances in this population.ConclusionThere is limited evidence of unintentional fentanyl use among people in Sydney and Melbourne, Australia who regularly inject heroin, suggesting that, currently, there is very little illicit fentanyl in Australian drug markets accessed by supervised injecting facilities attendees. This study demonstrates the feasibility of quick onsite testing to cost‐effectively screen large samples for fentanyl; however, the high false positive rate emphasises the need for confirmation of positive tests through advanced analytical techniques.

Closed-loop wearable naloxone injector system

Overdoses from non-medical use of opioids can lead to hypoxemic/hypercarbic respiratory failure, cardiac arrest, and death when left untreated. Opioid toxicity is readily reversed with naloxone, a competitive antagonist that can restore respiration. However, there remains a critical need for technologies to administer naloxone in the event of unwitnessed overdose events. We report a closed-loop wearable injector system that measures respiration and apneic motion associated with an opioid overdose event using a pair of on-body accelerometers, and administers naloxone subcutaneously upon detection of an apnea. Our proof-of-concept system has been evaluated in two environments: (i) an approved supervised injection facility (SIF) where people self-inject opioids under medical supervision and (ii) a hospital environment where we simulate opioid-induced apneas in healthy participants. In the SIF (n = 25), our system identified breathing rate and post-injection respiratory depression accurately when compared to a respiratory belt. In the hospital, our algorithm identified simulated apneic events and successfully injected participants with 1.2 mg of naloxone. Naloxone delivery was verified by intravenous blood draw post-injection for all participants. A closed-loop naloxone injector system has the potential to complement existing evidence-based harm reduction strategies and, in the absence of bystanders, help make opioid toxicity events functionally witnessed and in turn more likely to be successfully resuscitated.

Willingness to utilize supervised injection facilities among people who inject drugs in Iran: Findings from 2020 national HIV bio-behavioral surveillance survey

Supervised injection facilities (SIFs) have not yet been integrated into Iran's harm reduction programs. This study aimed to report the extent to which people who inject drugs (PWID) in Iran are willing to use SIFs. Participants were recruited from 11 major cities using respondent-driven sampling. Willingness to use SIFs was defined as a three-level categorical variable: low, moderate, or high. Of 2,490 PWID, 52.8% and 23.8% reported high and moderate willingness to use SIFs, respectively. PWID with a history of homelessness (relative-risk ratio (RRR): 2.22, 95% CI: 1.76–2.80), incarceration (1.86 [1.48–2.35]), hepatitis C infection (1.49 [1.13–1.97]), and non-fatal overdose (2.30 [1.69–3.13]) were more likely to be willing to utilize SIFs. Willingness to use SIFs was also higher among PWID who reported recent public injecting (2.24 [1.70–2.97]), daily injection (1.82 [1.35–2.45]), stimulants injection (2.39 [1.41–4.07]), syringe sharing (3.09 [1.23-7.74]), harm reduction services utilization (2.80 [2.13–3.68]), and food insecurity (8.28 [5.43-12.63]). The majority of PWID in Iran expressed willingness to use SIFs, in particular, those who were involved in higher-risk injection practices, dealing with structural risks, and had experienced drug-related harms. SIFs represent critical opportunities to deliver comprehensive harm reduction services to improve the health and well-being of PWID in Iran.

Assessing Drug Consumption Rooms and Longer Term (5 Year) Impacts on Community and Clients.

BackgroundDrug consumption rooms (DCRs) and supervised injecting facilities (SIFs) provide a safe environment in which people who inject drugs (PWIDs) can inject under hygienic and supervised conditions. Numerous reviews have documented the benefits of these facilities; however, there is a lack of clarity surrounding their long-term effects.PurposeTo conduct, with a systematic approach, a literature review, of published peer-reviewed literature assessing the long-term impacts of DCRs/SIFs.MethodsA systematic search of the PubMed and Embase database was performed using the keywords: (“SUPERVISED” OR “SAFE*”) AND (“CONSUMPTION” OR “INJECT*” OR “SHOOTING”) AND (“FACILITY*” OR “ROOM*” OR “GALLERY*” OR “CENTRE*” OR “CENTER*” OR “SITE*”). Included studies were original articles reporting outcomes for five or more years and addressed at least one of the following client or community outcomes; (i) drug-related harms; (ii) access to substance use treatment and other health services; (iii) impact on local PWID population; (iv) impact on public drug use, drug-related crime and violence; and (v) local community attitudes to DCRs.ResultsFour publications met our inclusion criteria, addressing four of the five outcomes. Long-term data suggested that while the health of PWID naturally declined over time, DCRs/SIFs helped reduce injecting-related harms. The studies showed that DCRs/SIFs facilitate drug treatment, access to health services and cessation of drug injecting. Local residents and business owners reported less public drug use and public syringe disposal following the opening of a DCR/SIF.ConclusionLong-term evidence on DCRs/SIFs is consistent with established short-term research demonstrating the benefits of these facilities. A relative paucity of studies was identified, with most evidence originating from Sydney and Vancouver. The overall body of evidence would be improved by future studies following outcomes over longer periods and being undertaken in a variety of jurisdictions and models of DCRs/SIFs.

Health programmes and services addressing the prevention and management of infectious diseases in people who inject drugs in Canada: a systematic integrative review

ObjectivesPeople who inject drugs (PWID) experience a high burden of injection drug use-related infectious disease and challenges in accessing adequate care. This study sought to identify programmes and services in...

Putting prohibitionist philosophy and populism before evidence on illicit drugs: Why has the Victorian Liberal‐National Party Coalition opposed Supervised Injecting Facilities for two decades?

AbstractIllicit drugs policy debates are often informed by philosophical contests between harm reduction and prohibition advocates. One particular harm reduction initiative has been the introduction of Supervised Injecting Facilities (SIFs) in many jurisdictions including two in Australia, one in New South Wales (2001) and one more recently in Victoria (2018). There is significant evidence that SIFs save lives and can also help to reduce broader social harm to communities. This paper examines the consistent opposition to SIFs by the conservative Victorian Liberal‐National Party Coalition over two decades with particular reference to the parliamentary debates of 2000 and 2018. It is concluded that the Coalition’s rejection of SIFs has been based overwhelmingly on prohibitionist philosophy and associated populism which frames drug use per se as a problem to be eradicated, rather than evidence on the effectiveness of SIFs in reducing harm to drug users and the wider community.

Understanding the Stigma and Feasibility of Opening a Safe Injection Facility in Baltimore City: A Qualitative Case Study

Supervised injection facilities (SIFs) are medically supervised facilities designed to provide a hygienic environment in which drug users can consume illicit drugs intravenously. SIFs can be cost saving, help to reduce transmission of disease, and decrease drug overdoses. There are no SIFs in the United States. In this study we used a multiple case study design to understand the stigma surrounding the use of a SIF and the feasibility of implementing the drug prevention strategy in Baltimore City by comparing experiences with opening a SIF in Sydney, Australia. We interviewed one healthcare worker at the Sydney SIF and ten community stakeholders in Baltimore City. Interviewees were asked about community stigma of SIFs, drug use, and feasibility of opening a SIF in Baltimore City. Six overarching themes were established including lack of trust, lack of public education, fear of police, concern about efficacy of harm reduction programs, drug user stigma, and concerns about implementation. Findings suggest that stigma surrounding drug use and drug users is the most important aspect in shaping the participant's varied perceptions of SIFs. Participants believed that for any change to occur, there must be multi-tiered collaboration at the level of government, healthcare, community, and law enforcement.

New and Emerging Opioid Overdose Risk Factors.

Purpose of ReviewThe purpose of this review is to provide a review of the current literature surrounding opioid overdose risk factors, focusing on relatively new factors in the opioid crisis.Recent FindingsBoth a market supply driving force and a subpopulation of people who use opioids actively seeking out fentanyl are contributing to its recent proliferation in the opioid market. Harm reduction techniques such as fentanyl testing strips, naloxone education and distribution, drug sampling behaviors, and supervised injection facilities are all seeing expanded use with increasing amounts of research being published regarding their effectiveness. Availability and use of interventions such as medication for opioid use disorder and peer recovery coaching programs are also on the rise to prevent opioid overdose.SummaryThe opioid epidemic is an evolving crisis, necessitating continuing research to identify novel overdose risk factors and the development of new interventions targeting at-risk populations.