Take-home emergency naloxone to prevent heroin overdose deaths after prison release: rationale and practicalities for the N-ALIVE randomized trial

Access to, Experience with, and Attitudes towards Take Home Naloxone: An Online Survey

The opioid public health crisis continues to burden individuals, communities, and economies. Public health opinion has emphasized the need for increased access to harm reduction services, but there is a dearth of information on the views and experiences of people who use opioids. Our study aimed to investigate the prevalence of naloxone use, attitudes, and experiences with naloxone among an online community of people who use drugs. We performed a cross-sectional survey looking at experiences with and attitudes towards take-home naloxone. Data is presented descriptively, with analysis of the differences between people who do and do not use opioids using the χ2 and Fisher's exact tests. There were 1,143 respondents, of whom 70% were from the United States. Only 38% of participants who use opioids had received naloxone training, but 56% of these individuals said that they felt comfortable using a naloxone kit. Nearly all respondents (95%) said they would be willing to use naloxone on someone who had overdosed and approximately 90% would want naloxone used on them in case of an overdose. Regarding harm reduction, 24% of respondents said they had access to safe use programs, and 33% said they had access to clean needle exchange programs. A majority of the participants who use opioids were in favor of having naloxone with them when using drugs and believed naloxone should be freely available. This study demonstrates the receptiveness of take-home naloxone and highlights the need for better implementation of naloxone within communities that use opioids.

Pills and the damage done: the opioid epidemic as man-made crisis

The prescription opioid epidemic has slowly evolved over the past quarter century with increasingly detrimental consequences for public health. Man-made crises are often unforeseen and characterized by a situation without natural causes where - because of human intent, error, negligence, or the failure of manmade systems - the level of needs in the population exceeds available resources to counter the problem. This paper presents the prescription opioid epidemic as a man-made crisis and explores the public health impact of opioid manufacturers and other industries producing commodities with addictive potential as a shared vulnerability among countries. We examine this concept within the framework of the commercial determinants of health. We address three key aspects of the commercial determinants of health: (1) Cross-industry mechanisms, (2) policy inertia, and (3) the role of industry in science. Within cross-industry mechanisms, we explore parallels between prescription opioid epidemic and unhealthy commodity industries in terms of marketing, corporate use of misinformation, and diversionary tactics. Next, we examine how policy inertia has dominated the slow response to this man-made crisis. Lastly, we discuss how results from clinical trials are used as a key marketing strategy for drugs. The origins of the prescription opioid epidemic may be traced to innovations in drug development with the promise of improved pain management. However, through multiple factors, including fraudulent marketing from pharmaceutical industry and policy inertia, the resulting crisis represents a multi-system failure of regulation exploited by corporate greed.

Interventions to reduce suicidal thoughts and behaviours among people in contact with the criminal justice system: A global systematic review

BACKGROUND

People who experience incarceration die by suicide at a higher rate than those who have no prior criminal justice system contact, but little is known about the effectiveness of interventions in other criminal justice settings. We aimed to synthesise evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions to reduce suicide and suicide-related behaviours among people in contact with the criminal justice system.

METHODS

We searched Embase, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and grey literature databases for articles published between 1 January 2000 and 1 June 2021. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020185989).

FINDINGS

Thirty-eight studies (36 primary research articles, two grey literature reports) met our inclusion criteria, 23 of which were conducted in adult custodial settings in high-income, Western countries. Four studies were randomised controlled trials. Two-thirds of studies (n=26, 68%) were assessed as medium quality, 11 (29%) were assessed as high quality, and one (3%) was assessed as low quality. Most had considerable methodological limitations and very few interventions had been rigorously evaluated; as such, drawing robust conclusions about the efficacy of interventions was difficult.

INTERPRETATION

More high-quality evidence from criminal justice settings other than adult prisons, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, should be considered a priority for future research.

FUNDING

This work was funded by the Australian government's National Suicide Prevention Taskforce. RB is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Emerging Leader Investigator Grant (EL2; GNT2008073). MW is supported by a NHMRC Postgraduate Scholarship (GNT1151103). SF was funded by the NIHR HTA Programme (HTA Project:16/159/09).

Take-Home Naloxone and the Prevention of Deaths from Heroin Overdose: Pursuing Strong Science, Fuller Understanding, Greater Impact

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

Realization of the life-saving potential of "take-home naloxone" has been a personal journey, but it has also been a collective journey. It has been a story of individual exploration and growth, and also a story of changes at a societal level. "Take-home naloxone" has matured since its first conceptualization a quarter of a century ago. It required recognition of the enormous burden of deaths from drug overdose (particularly heroin and other opioids), and also realization of critical clusterings (such as post-release from prison). It also required realization that, since many overdose deaths are witnessed, we can potentially prevent many deaths by mobilizing drug users themselves, their families, and the wider caring community to act as intervention workforce to give life-saving interim emergency care. Summary of Scope: This article explores 5 areas (many illustrations UK-based where the author works): firstly, the need for strong science; secondly, our improved understanding of opioid overdose and deaths; thirdly, the search for greater impact from our policies and interventions; fourthly, developing better forms of naloxone; and fifthly, examining the challenges still to be addressed.

KEY MESSAGES

"Take-home naloxone" is an exemplar of harm reduction with potential global impact - drug policy and practice for the public good. However, "having the potential" is not good enough - there needs to be actual implementation. This will be easier once the component parts of "take-home naloxone" are improved (better naloxone products, better training aids, revised legislation, and explicit funding support). Many improvements are already possible, but we hesitate about implementation. It is our responsibility to drive progress faster. With "take-home naloxone," we can be proud of what we have achieved, but we must also be humble about how much more we still need to do.

Bridging institutional logics: Implementing naloxone distribution for people exiting jail in three California counties

Drug overdose is the leading cause of death among formerly incarcerated people. Distribution of the opioid overdose medication naloxone to people who use drugs reduces overdose mortality, and officials in many jurisdictions are now considering or implementing programs to offer naloxone to people exiting jails and prisons. The principles and practices of harm reduction programs such as naloxone distribution conflict with those of penal institutions, raising the question of how organizations based on opposing institutional logics can collaborate on lifesaving programs. Using in-depth interviews and observations conducted over four years with 34 penal, medical, public health, and harm reduction practitioners, we introduce and conceptualize two organizational features to explain why this therapeutic intervention was implemented in local jails in two of three California counties. First, interorganizational bridges between harm reduction, medical, and penal organizations facilitated mutual understanding and ongoing collaboration among administrators and frontline workers in different agencies. Second, respected and influential champions within public health and penal organizations put jail-based naloxone distribution on the local agenda and cultivated support among key officials. Our findings offer guidance for future studies of institutional logics and policy responses to the overdose crisis.

Understanding overdose incidents in Canadian federal custody

BACKGROUND

While the community effects of the opioid-related drug crisis in Canada are well documented, limited detailed data is available on overdose trends among custodial populations. Given that this crisis has disproportionate impacts on justice involved persons, research is needed to understand the implications of this crisis within institutional settings.

METHODS

We examined all overdose incidents that occurred between the 2012/2013 and 2018/2019 fiscal years in a federal correctional institution in Canada. An incident report search was conducted to identify overdose related incidents during this period. Information about the incident and characteristics of the victim was collected from incident reports, investigations, and victim case files.

RESULTS

Over the period under examination, overdose incidents steadily increased (i.e., from 40 in 2012/2013, to 110 non-fatal incidents in 2018/2019), although there was considerable regional and institutional variation. The number of incidents involving opioids, particularly fentanyl, increased both in raw numbers and as a percentage of overall incidents (i.e., from 3% in 2012/2013 to 47% in 2017/2018, and 34% of non-fatal incidents in 2018/2019). Other substances continue to contribute to overdose incidents; in fact, non-opioid prescription medications (i.e., non-illicit medications such as anti-convulsant drugs and anti-depressants) remain the most common among intentional non-fatal incidents. Relative to the general in-custody population, victims of overdose incidents tended to be younger and were more likely to be serving a determinate sentence, be on a repeat federal sentence, and be serving time for robbery. Mental health conditions and histories of substance use were common.

CONCLUSION

The effects of the overdose crisis are pronounced within certain Canadian federal institutions, illustrated by a growing number of fentanyl-related incidents. Institutional variation and variation in incidents (e.g., substance and intentionality) highlight diversity in drug activities among this custodial population and the need for multi-faceted responses that are reflective of local situations.

Addiction stigma and the production of impediments to take-home naloxone uptake

Opioid overdose deaths are a major health issue in Australia and around the world. Programmes to provide opioid consumers with 'take-home' naloxone to reverse overdose exist internationally, but uptake by mainstream health services and consumers remains inconsistent. Researchers have identified a range of important educational, training and logistical impediments to take-home naloxone uptake and distribution, yet they have focused less on the social dynamics that can enhance or limit access, such as stigma. In this article, we also explore impediments to uptake, drawing on qualitative interview data gathered for an Australian research project on take-home naloxone. Mobilising a performative approach to stigma, we argue that overdose and prevention are shaped by the social dynamics of stigma and, as such, responsibility for dealing with overdose, as with take-home naloxone, should also be considered social (i.e. shared among peers, the public, communities and governments). Our interview data illuminate the various ways in which addiction stigma limits the possibilities and capacities of take-home naloxone and overdose prevention. First, we focus on how stigma may impede professional information provision about take-home naloxone by limiting the extent to which it is presented as a matter of interest for all opioid consumers, not just those who consume opioids illicitly. Second, we explore how stigma may limit the scale-up and expansion of programmes and access points. From here, we focus on how stigma co-constitutes the politics of overdose and prevention, rendering take-home naloxone ill-suited to many social settings of overdose. In closing, we point out that stigma is not just a post hoc impediment to access to and use of take-home naloxone but is central to opioid overdose production itself, and to effective prevention. While take-home naloxone is an excellent life-saving initiative, uncritically valorising it may divert attention from broader goals, such as the de-stigmatisation of drug consumption through decriminalisation, and other ambitious attempts to reduce overdose.

Take-Home Naloxone for the Emergency Interim Management of Opioid Overdose: The Public Health Application of an Emergency Medicine

Naloxone is a well-established essential medicine for the treatment of life-threatening heroin/opioid overdose in emergency medicine. Over two decades, the concept of 'take-home naloxone' has evolved, comprising pre-provision of an emergency supply to laypersons likely to witness an opioid overdose (e.g. peers and family members of people who use opioids as well as non-medical personnel), with the recommendation to administer the naloxone to the overdose victim as interim care while awaiting an ambulance. There is an urgent need for more widespread naloxone access considering the growing problem of opioid overdose deaths, accounting for more than 100,000 deaths worldwide annually. Rises in mortality are particularly sharp in North America, where the ongoing prescription opioid problem is now overlaid with a rapid growth in overdose deaths from heroin and illicit fentanyl. Using opioids alone is dangerous, and the mortality risk is clustered at certain times and contexts, including on prison release and discharge from hospital and residential care. The provision of take-home naloxone has required the introduction of new legislation and new naloxone products. These include pre-filled syringes and auto-injectors and, crucially, new concentrated nasal sprays (four formulations recently approved in different countries) with speed of onset comparable to intramuscular naloxone and relative bioavailability of approximately 40-50%. Choosing the right naloxone dose in the fentanyl era is a matter of ongoing debate, but the safety margin of the approved nasal sprays is superior to improvised nasal kits. New legislation in different countries permits over-the-counter sales or other prescription-free methods of provision. However, access remains uneven with take-home naloxone still not provided in many countries and communities, and with ongoing barriers contributing to implementation inertia. Take-home naloxone is an important component of the response to the global overdose problem, but greater commitment to implementation will be essential, alongside improved affordable products, if a greater impact is to be achieved.

Comparing the predictive capability of self-report and medically-verified non-fatal overdose in adults released from prison: A prospective data linkage study

BACKGROUND

Self-reported non-fatal overdose (NFOD) is a predictor of future overdose and is often used to target overdose prevention for people released from prison. However, the level of agreement between self-reported and medically-verified NFOD history remains unknown. This study aimed to determine the agreement between, and predictive value of, self-reported and medically-verified history of NFOD in people recently released from prison.

METHODS

Pre-release baseline survey data from 1307 adults in prison surveyed from 2008 to 2010 in Queensland, Australia were linked to ambulance, emergency department, and hospital records. We compared the agreement of self-reported NFOD history in the baseline survey and medically-verified NFOD ascertained through linked medical data. Unadjusted and adjusted regression models were used to determine the association between self-reported and medically verified NFOD history and medically-verified NFOD after release from prison.

RESULTS

224 (19 %) participants self-reported NFOD history only, 75 (5 %) had medically-verified NFOD history only, and 56 (4 %) both self-reported and had medically-verified NFOD history. Compared to those with no NFOD history, those who self-reported and had a medical history of NFOD (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 6.1, 95 %CI 3.1-11.9), those with a medical history only (AHR 3.4, 95 %CI 1.7-7.0), and those who self-reported only (AHR 1.8, 95 %CI 1.0-3.5) were at increased risk of medically-verified NFOD after release from prison.

CONCLUSIONS

Relying on self-report of NFOD is likely to miss people at increased risk of future NFOD, many of whom could be identified through medical records. Wherever possible, data related to NFOD should be triangulated from multiple sources.

Optimising opioid substitution therapy in the prison environment

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to examine the current provision of opioid substitution therapy (OST) during and immediately following release from detention in prisons in England and Wales.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

A group of experts was convened to comment on current practices and to make recommendations for improving OST management in prison. Current practices were previously assessed using an online survey and a focus group with experience of OST in prison (Webster, 2017).

FINDINGS

Disruption to the management of addiction and reduced treatment choice for OST adversely influences adequate provision of OST in prison. A key concern was the routine diversion of opiate substitutes to other prisoners. The new controlled drug formulations were considered a positive development to ensure streamlined and efficient OST administration. The following patient populations were identified as having concerns beyond their opioid use, and therefore require additional considerations in prison: older people with comorbidities and complex treatment needs; women who have experienced trauma and have childcare issues; and those with existing mental health needs requiring effective understanding and treatment in prison.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

Integration of clinical and psychosocial services would enable a joint care plan to be tailored for each individual with opioid dependence and include options for detoxification or maintenance treatment. This would better enable those struggling with opioid use to make informed choices concerning their care during incarceration and for the period immediately following their release. Improvements in coordination of OST would facilitate inclusion of strategies to further streamline this process for the benefit of prisoners and prison staff.

Interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems

BACKGROUND

This review represents one from a family of three reviews focusing on interventions for drug-using offenders. Many people under the care of the criminal justice system have co-occurring mental health problems and drug misuse problems; it is important to identify the most effective treatments for this vulnerable population.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems in reducing criminal activity or drug use, or both.This review addresses the following questions.• Does any treatment for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems reduce drug use?• Does any treatment for drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems reduce criminal activity?• Does the treatment setting (court, community, prison/secure establishment) affect intervention outcome(s)?• Does the type of treatment affect treatment outcome(s)?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 12 databases up to February 2019 and checked the reference lists of included studies. We contacted experts in the field for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials designed to prevent relapse of drug use and/or criminal activity among drug-using offenders with co-occurring mental health problems.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane .

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 studies with a total of 2606 participants. Interventions were delivered in prison (eight studies; 61%), in court (two studies; 15%), in the community (two studies; 15%), or at a medium secure hospital (one study; 8%). Main sources of bias were unclear risk of selection bias and high risk of detection bias.Four studies compared a therapeutic community intervention versus (1) treatment as usual (two studies; 266 participants), providing moderate-certainty evidence that participants who received the intervention were less likely to be involved in subsequent criminal activity (risk ratio (RR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.84) or returned to prison (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.67); (2) a cognitive-behavioural therapy (one study; 314 participants), reporting no significant reduction in self-reported drug use (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.32), re-arrest for any type of crime (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.09), criminal activity (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.05), or drug-related crime (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.36), yielding low-certainty evidence; and (3) a waiting list control (one study; 478 participants), showing a significant reduction in return to prison for those people engaging in the therapeutic community (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.79), providing moderate-certainty evidence.One study (235 participants) compared a mental health treatment court with an assertive case management model versus treatment as usual, showing no significant reduction at 12 months' follow-up on an Addictive Severity Index (ASI) self-report of drug use (mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), conviction for a new crime (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.22), or re-incarceration to jail (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.01), providing low-certainty evidence.Four studies compared motivational interviewing/mindfulness and cognitive skills with relaxation therapy (one study), a waiting list control (one study), or treatment as usual (two studies). In comparison to relaxation training, one study reported narrative information on marijuana use at three-month follow-up assessment. Researchers reported a main effect < .007 with participants in the motivational interviewing group, showing fewer problems than participants in the relaxation training group, with moderate-certainty evidence. In comparison to a waiting list control, one study reported no significant reduction in self-reported drug use based on the ASI (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.29) and on abstinence from drug use (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 11.43), presenting low-certainty evidence at six months (31 participants). In comparison to treatment as usual, two studies (with 40 participants) found no significant reduction in frequency of marijuana use at three months post release (MD -1.05, 95% CI -2.39 to 0.29) nor time to first arrest (MD 0.87, 95% CI -0.12 to 1.86), along with a small reduction in frequency of re-arrest (MD -0.66, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.01) up to 36 months, yielding low-certainty evidence; the other study with 80 participants found no significant reduction in positive drug screens at 12 months (MD -0.7, 95% CI -3.5 to 2.1), providing very low-certainty evidence.Two studies reported on the use of multi-systemic therapy involving juveniles and families versus treatment as usual and adolescent substance abuse therapy. In comparing treatment as usual, researchers found no significant reduction up to seven months in drug dependence on the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test (DUDIT) score (MD -0.22, 95% CI -2.51 to 2.07) nor in arrests (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.36), providing low-certainty evidence (156 participants). In comparison to an adolescent substance abuse therapy, one study (112 participants) found significant reduction in re-arrests up to 24 months (MD 0.24, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.28), based on low-certainty evidence.One study (38 participants) reported on the use of interpersonal psychotherapy in comparison to a psychoeducational intervention. Investigators found no significant reduction in self-reported drug use at three months (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50), providing very low-certainty evidence. The final study (29 participants) compared legal defence service and wrap-around social work services versus legal defence service only and found no significant reductions in the number of new offences committed at 12 months (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.07 to 6.01), yielding very low-certainty evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic community interventions and mental health treatment courts may help people to reduce subsequent drug use and/or criminal activity. For other interventions such as interpersonal psychotherapy, multi-systemic therapy, legal defence wrap-around services, and motivational interviewing, the evidence is more uncertain. Studies showed a high degree of variation, warranting a degree of caution in interpreting the magnitude of effect and the direction of benefit for treatment outcomes.

An evaluation of Take Home Naloxone program implementation in British Columbian correctional facilities

Purpose

To understand how the Take Home Naloxone (THN) program is implemented in two pilot correctional facilities in British Columbia (BC), Canada, in order to identify areas for program improvement and inform the expansion of the program to other Canadian correctional facilities The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Design/methodology/approach

Two focus groups and one interview were conducted with healthcare staff at two pilot correctional facilities. Sessions were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and divergent and convergent experiences within and between the facilities were explored in an iterative process. Key themes and lessons learned were identified and later validated by focus group participants.

Findings

Key themes that emerged included: challenges and importance of the train-the-trainer program for healthcare staff conducting participant training sessions; potential for improved prison population engagement and awareness of the program; tailoring program resources to the unique needs of an incarcerated population; challenges connecting participants to community harm reduction resources following release; and clarifying and enhancing the role of correctional officers to support the program.

Research limitations/implications

The correctional setting presents unique challenges and opportunities for the THN program that must be considered for program effectiveness.

Originality/value

This evaluation was conducted to inform program expansion amidst a historic opioid overdose epidemic in BC, and adds to the limited yet growing body of literature on the implementation and evaluation of this program in correctional settings globally.

Criminal justice continuum for opioid users at risk of overdose

The United States (US) is in the midst of an epidemic of opioid use; however, overdose mortality disproportionately affects certain subgroups. For example, more than half of state prisoners and approximately two-thirds of county jail detainees report issues with substance use. Overdose is one of the leading causes of mortality among individuals released from correctional settings. Even though the criminal justice (CJ) system interacts with a disproportionately high number of individuals at risk of opioid use and overdose, few CJ agencies screen for opioid use disorder (OUD). Even less provide access to medication assisted treatment (e.g. methadone, buprenorphine, and depot naltrexone), which is one of the most effective tools to combat addiction and lower overdose risk. However, there is an opportunity to implement programs across the CJ continuum in collaboration with law enforcement, courts, correctional facilities, community service providers, and probation and parole. In the current paper, we introduce the concept of a "CJ Continuum of Care for Opioid Users at Risk of Overdose", grounded by the Sequential Intercept Model. We present each step on the CJ Continuum and include a general overview and highlight opportunities for: 1) screening for OUD and overdose risk, 2) treatment and/or diversion, and 3) overdose prevention and naloxone provision.

Perceptions of Health-Related Community Reentry Challenges among Incarcerated Drug Users in Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, and Ukraine

Facing competing demands with limited resources following release from prison, people who inject drugs (PWID) may neglect health needs, with grave implications including relapse, overdose, and non-continuous care. We examined the relative importance of health-related tasks after release compared to tasks of everyday life among a total sample of 577 drug users incarcerated in Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Kyrgyzstan. A proxy measure of whether participants identified a task as applicable (easy or hard) versus not applicable was used to determine the importance of each task. Correlates of the importance of health-related reentry tasks were analyzed using logistic regression, with a parsimonious model being derived using Bayesian lasso method. Despite all participants having substance use disorders and high prevalence of comorbidities, participants in all three countries prioritized finding a source of income, reconnecting with family, and staying out of prison over receiving treatment for substance use disorders, general health conditions, and initiating methadone treatment. Participants with poorer general health were more likely to prioritize treatment for substance use disorders. While prior drug injection and opioid agonist treatment (OAT) correlated with any interest in methadone in all countries, only in Ukraine did a small number of participants prioritize getting methadone as the most important post-release task. While community-based OAT is available in all three countries and prison-based OAT only in Kyrgyzstan, Kyrgyz prisoners were less likely to choose help staying off drugs and getting methadone. Overall, prisoners consider methadone treatment inapplicable to their pre-release planning. Future studies that involve patient decision-making and scale-up of OAT within prison settings are needed to better improve individual and public health.

Methods for delivering the UK's multi-centre prison-based naloxone-on-release pilot randomised trial (N-ALIVE): Europe's largest prison-based randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Naloxone is an opioid antagonist used for emergency resuscitation following opioid overdose. Prisoners with a history of heroin use by injection have a high risk of drug-related death in the first weeks after prison-release. The N-ALIVE trial was planned as a large prison-based randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the effectiveness of naloxone-on-release in the prevention of fatal opiate overdoses soon after release. The N-ALIVE pilot trial was conducted to test the main trial's assumptions on recruitment of prisons and prisoners, and the logistics for ensuring that participants received their N-ALIVE pack on release.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Adult prisoners who had ever injected heroin, were incarcerated for ≥7 days and were expected to be released within 3 months were eligible. Participants were randomised to receive, on liberation, a pack containing a single 'rescue' injection of naloxone or a control pack with no naloxone syringe. The trial was double-blind prior to prison-release.

RESULTS

We randomised 1685 prisoners (842 naloxone; 843 control) across 16 prisons in England. We stopped randomisation on 8 December 2014 because only one-third of administrations of naloxone-on-release were to the randomised ex-prisoner; two-thirds were to others whom we were not tracing.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Prevention RCTs are seldom conducted within prisons; we demonstrated the feasibility of conducting a multi-prison RCT to prevent fatality from opioid overdose in the outside community. We terminated the N-ALIVE trial due to the infeasibility of individualised randomisation to naloxone-on-release. Large RCTs are feasible within prisons.

Cost-Effectiveness of Take-Home Naloxone for the Prevention of Overdose Fatalities among Heroin Users in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

Heroin overdose is a major cause of premature death. Naloxone is an opioid antagonist that is effective for the reversal of heroin overdose in emergency situations and can be used by nonmedical responders.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of distributing naloxone to adults at risk of heroin overdose for use by nonmedical responders compared with no naloxone distribution in a European healthcare setting (United Kingdom).

METHODS

A Markov model with an integrated decision tree was developed based on an existing model, using UK data where available. We evaluated an intramuscular naloxone distribution reaching 30% of heroin users. Costs and effects were evaluated over a lifetime and discounted at 3.5%. The results were assessed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The model estimated that distribution of intramuscular naloxone, would decrease overdose deaths by around 6.6%. In a population of 200,000 heroin users this equates to the prevention of 2,500 premature deaths at an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of £899. The sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Our evaluation suggests that the distribution of take-home naloxone decreased overdose deaths by around 6.6% and was cost-effective with an incremental cost per QALY gained well below a £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold set by UK decision-makers. The model code has been made available to aid future research. Further study is warranted on the impact of different formulations of naloxone on cost-effectiveness and the impact take-home naloxone has on the wider society.

Impacts of an opioid overdose prevention intervention delivered subsequent to acute care

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose is a major and increasing cause of injury and death. There is an urgent need for interventions to reduce overdose events among high-risk persons.

METHODS

Adults at elevated risk for opioid overdose involving heroin or pharmaceutical opioids who had been cared for in an emergency department (ED) were randomised to overdose education combined with a brief behavioural intervention and take-home naloxone or usual care. Outcomes included: (1) time to first opioid overdose-related event resulting in medical attention or death using competing risks survival analysis; and (2) ED visit and hospitalisation rates, using negative binomial regression and adjusting for time at risk.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period, 24% of the 241 participants had at least one overdose event, 85% had one or more ED visits and 55% had at least one hospitalisation, with no significant differences between intervention and comparison groups. The instantaneous risk of an overdose event was not significantly lower for the intervention group (sub-HR: 0.83; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.40).

DISCUSSION

These null findings may be due in part to the severity of the population in terms of housing insecurity (70% impermanently housed), drug use, unemployment and acute healthcare issues. Given the high overdose and healthcare utilisation rates, more intensive interventions, such as direct referral and provision of housing and opioid agonist treatment medications, may be necessary to have a substantial impact on opioid overdoses for this high-acuity population in acute care settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT0178830; Results.

Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution Programmes and the Ethics of Task Shifting

North America is in the grips of an epidemic of opioid-related poisonings. Overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programmes emerged as an option for structurally vulnerable populations who could not or would not access mainstream emergency medical services in the event of an overdose. These task shifting programmes utilize lay persons to deliver opioid resuscitation in the context of longstanding stigmatization and marginalization from mainstream healthcare services. OEND programmes exist at the intersection of harm reduction and emergency services. One goal of OEND programmes is to help redress the health-related inequities common among people who use drugs, which include minimizing the gap between people who use drugs and the formal healthcare system. However, if this goal is not achieved these inequities may be entrenched. In this article, we consider the ethical promises and perils associated with OEND as task shifting. We argue that public health practitioners must consider the ethical aspects of task shifting programmes that may inadvertently harm already structurally vulnerable populations. We believe that even if OEND programmes reduce opioid-related deaths, we nevertheless question if, by virtue of its existence, OEND programmes might also unintentionally disenfranchise structurally vulnerable populations from comprehensive healthcare services, including mainstream emergency care.

A cross-national analysis of the association between years of implementation of opioid substitution treatments and drug-related deaths in Europe from 1995 to 2013

Data at the individual-level provide evidence that opioid substitution treatment (OST) programs protect against mortality for opioid dependent populations. Prior research has not examined the merits of national implementation of opioid substitution programs for reducing mortality at the country-level. This study elucidates longitudinal associations between country-level implementation of opioid substitution treatment programs on mortality rates of drug related deaths (DRD) from 1995 to 2013 in 30 European nations. Cases of DRD were measured using National Definitions for each country from official sources of data. Preliminary analysis of dispersion of cases of DRD using means and variances justified use of the negative binomial regression model with a population offset. Year and country-level fixed effects negative binomial regression models investigated the association between years of implementation of methadone maintenance therapy (MMT), OST in prison, and high dose buprenorphine treatment (HDBT) implementation and mortality rates from drug related deaths after adjusting for unemployment rates, heroin seizures and per capita expenditures on health. Beta coefficients were converted to Incidence Rate Ratios (IRR) and standard errors bootstrapped using non-parametric methods to adjust for bias (SD_bs). The mean mortality rate of DRD was 1.81 from 1995 to 2013. In adjusted models, each additional year of MMT (IRR = .61, SD = .04, p < .001; SD_bs = .08, p < .001), prison OST (IRR = .90, SD = .01, p < .001; SD_bs = .02, p < .001), and HDBT (IRR = .09, SD = .02, p < .001; SD_bs = .02, p < .01) was significantly associated with lower rates of DRDs after adjusting for country and year fixed effects. Implementation of OST programs in the general population and in prison settings may have protected against mortality from drug use at the country-level in Europe from 1995 to 2013.

Overdose prevention training with naloxone distribution in a prison in Oslo, Norway: a preliminary study

BACKGROUND

Prison inmates face a ten times increased risk of experiencing a fatal drug overdose during their first 2 weeks upon release than their non-incarcerated counterparts. Naloxone, the antidote to an opioid overdose, has been shown to be feasible and effective when administered by bystanders. Given the particular risk that newly released inmates face, it is vital to assess their knowledge about opioid overdoses, as well as the impact of brief overdose prevention training conducted inside prisons.

METHODS

Prison inmates nearing release (within 6 months) in Oslo, Norway, voluntarily underwent a brief naloxone training. Using a questionnaire, inmates were assessed immediately prior to and following a naloxone training. Descriptive statistics were performed for main outcome variables, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the participants' two questionnaire scores from pre-and post-training.

RESULTS

Participating inmates (n = 31) were found to have a high baseline knowledge of risk factors, symptoms, and care regarding opioid overdoses. Nonetheless, a brief naloxone training session prior to release significantly improved knowledge scores in all areas assessed (p < 0.001). The training appears to be most beneficial in improving knowledge regarding the naloxone, including its use, effect, administration, and aftercare procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the high risk of overdosing that prison inmates face upon release, the need for prevention programs is critical. Naloxone training in the prison setting may be an effective means of improving opioid overdose response knowledge for this particularly vulnerable group. Naloxone training provided in the prison setting may improve the ability of inmates to recognize and manage opioid overdoses after their release; however, further studies on a larger scale are needed.

Ambulance attendances resulting from self-harm after release from prison: a prospective data linkage study

OBJECTIVE

Incarcerated adults are at high risk of self-harm and suicide and remain so after release into the community. The aims of this study were to estimate the number of ambulance attendances due to self-harm in adults following release from prison, and to identify factors predictive of such attendances.

METHODS

Baseline surveys with 1309 adults within 6 weeks of expected release from prison between 2008 and 2010 were linked prospectively with state-wide correctional, ambulance, emergency department, hospital and death records in Queensland, Australia. Associations between baseline demographic, criminal justice and mental health-related factors, and subsequent ambulance attendances resulting from self-harm, were investigated using negative binomial regression.

RESULTS

During 4691 person-years of follow-up (median 3.86 years per participant), there were 2892 ambulance attendances in the community, of which 120 (3.9%) were due to self-harm. In multivariable analyses, being Indigenous [incidence rate ratio (IRR): 2.10 (95% CI 1.14-3.86)], having previously been hospitalised for psychiatric treatment [IRR: 2.65 (95% CI 1.44-4.87)], being identified by prison staff as being at risk of self-harm whilst incarcerated [IRR: 2.12 (95% CI 1.11-4.06)] and having a prior ambulance attendance due to self-harm [IRR: 3.16 (95% CI 1.31-7.61)] were associated with self-harm attendances.

CONCLUSIONS

Ambulance attendances resulting from self-harm following release from prison are common and represent an opportunity for tertiary intervention for self-harm. The high prevalence of such attendances, in conjunction with the strong association with prior psychiatric problems, reinforces the importance of providing appropriate ambulance staff training in the assessment and management of self-harm, and mental health problems more broadly, in this vulnerable population.

The extent of and factors associated with self-reported overdose and self-reported receipt of naloxone among people who inject drugs (PWID) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland

BACKGROUND

Overdose is a major cause of death among PWID, and for opioid overdoses naloxone administration can reduce harm. However, globally there is limited national level data on the extent of non-fatal overdose and naloxone uptake. The first national level data on the extent of self-reported overdose and self-reported receipt of naloxone among UK PWID, providing a baseline to monitor the impact of the recent policy change regarding naloxone availability, is presented.

METHODS

Data on self-reported overdose and receipt of naloxone during the preceding year for 2013-2014 from a national survey of PWID was analysed. Participants who reported injecting during the preceding year were included.

RESULTS

Participants (3850) were predominantly male (75%); mean age was 36 years. The most commonly injected drugs were: heroin (91%), crack (45%) and amphetamine (29%). 15% (591) reported overdosing during the preceding year. There were no differences in the proportion reporting overdose by age or gender, but overdose was more common among those who: injected multiple drugs; recently ceased addiction treatment; injected with used needles/syringes; ever had transactional sex; had used a sexual health clinic or emergency department and lived in Wales or Northern Ireland. Among those reporting an overdose during the preceding year, a third reported two to four overdoses and 7.5% five or more overdoses; half reported receiving naloxone. Those reporting naloxone receipt in the preceding year were more likely to: live in Wales or Northern Ireland; ever received used needles/syringes; ever been imprisoned; and less likely to have injected two drug types.

CONCLUSION

These data provide a baseline for monitoring the impact of the 2015 UK policy change to improve take-home naloxone access. Interventions tackling overdose should promote naloxone awareness and access, and target those who; are poly-drug injectors, have ceased treatment, share needles/syringes and whose drug use links to sexual activity.

Randomized controlled pilot trial of naloxone-on-release to prevent post-prison opioid overdose deaths

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Naloxone is an opioid antagonist used for emergency resuscitation following opioid overdose. Prisoners with a history of heroin injection have a high risk of drug-related death soon after release from prison. The NALoxone InVEstigation (N-ALIVE) pilot trial (ISRCTN34044390) tested feasibility measures for randomized provision of naloxone-on-release (NOR) to eligible prisoners in England.

DESIGN

Parallel-group randomized controlled pilot trial.

SETTING

English prisons.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1685 adult heroin injectors, incarcerated for at least 7 days pre-randomization, release due within 3 months and more than 6 months since previous N-ALIVE release.

INTERVENTION

Using 1 : 1 minimization, prisoners were randomized to receive on release a pack containing either a single 'rescue' injection of naloxone or a control pack with no syringe.

MEASUREMENTS

Key feasibility outcomes were tested against prior expectations: on participation (14 English prisons; 2800 prisoners), consent (75% for randomization), returned prisoner self-questionnaires (RPSQs: 207), NOR-carriage (75% in first 4 weeks) and overdose presence (80%).

FINDINGS

Prisons (16) and prisoners (1685) were willing to participate [consent rate, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 70-74%]; 218 RPSQs were received; NOR-carriage (95% CI = 63-79%) and overdose presence (95% CI = 75-84%) were as expected. We randomized 842 to NOR and 843 to control during 30 months but stopped early, because only one-third of NOR administrations were to the ex-prisoner. Nine deaths within 12 weeks of release were registered for 1557 randomized participants released before 9 December 2014.

CONCLUSIONS

Large randomized trials are feasible with prison populations. Provision of take-home emergency naloxone prior to prison release may be a life-saving interim measure to prevent heroin overdose deaths among ex-prisoners and the wider population.

External data required timely response by the Trial Steering-Data Monitoring Committee for the NALoxone InVEstigation (N-ALIVE) pilot trial

The prison-based N-ALIVE pilot trial had undertaken to notify the Research Ethics Committee and participants if we had reason to believe that the N-ALIVE pilot trial would not proceed to the main trial. In this paper, we describe how external data for the third year of before/after evaluation from Scotland's National Naloxone Programme, a related public health policy, were anticipated by eliciting prior opinion about the Scottish results in the month prior to their release as official statistics. We summarise how deliberations by the N-ALIVE Trial Steering-Data Monitoring Committee (TS-DMC) on N-ALIVE's own interim data, together with those on naloxone-on-release (NOR) from Scotland, led to the decision to cease randomization in the N-ALIVE pilot trial and recommend to local Principal Investigators that NOR be offered to already-randomized prisoners who had not yet been released.

Characterization and Management of Patients with Heroin versus Nonheroin Opioid Overdoses: Experience at an Academic Medical Center

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To characterize the differences between patients who had heroin and nonheroin opioid overdoses and to determine whether there were any significant differences in their management with regard to the naloxone use.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Large academic medical center.

PATIENTS

A total of 923 patients admitted to the medical center who were identified for overdose by heroin or other opiate-related narcotics between January 2010 and September 2015; 480 patients experienced a nonheroin opioid overdose event, and 443 patients experienced a heroin overdose event.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients presenting with heroin overdose tended to be younger and male, with higher rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection compared with those presenting with nonheroin opioid overdose (p<0.05). Patients in the heroin group were also more likely to have a previous overdose event, history of injection drug use, and history of prescription opioid abuse compared with the nonheroin group (p<0.05). Those presenting with heroin overdose were more likely to receive naloxone in the prehospital setting (p<0.05) but were less likely to receive naloxone once admitted (p<0.05). Patients with nonheroin opioid overdoses required more continuous infusions of naloxone (p<0.05) and admission to the intensive care unit (p<0.05). Of all 923 patients, 178 (19.3%) had a repeat admission for any reason, and 70 (7.6%) were readmitted over the course of the study period for another overdose event with the same drug. The proportion of patients presenting with a heroin overdose steadily increased from 2010-2015; the number of patients presenting to the emergency department with nonheroin opioid overdoses steadily decreased. As rates of heroin overdose increased each year, the incidence of HCV infection increased dramatically.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that the incidence of heroin overdoses has significantly increased over the last several years, and the rates of HCV infection 4-fold since the start of the study period. Patients admitted for nonheroin opioid overdose were more likely to be admitted to the hospital and intensive care unit compared with those admitted for heroin overdose. The rise in overdose events only further illustrates a gap in our understanding of the cycle of addiction, drug abuse, and overdose events.

‘Naloxone works’: The politics of knowledge in ‘evidence-based’ drug policy

For over 20 years, drug policy experts have been calling for the wider availability of naloxone, to enable lay overdose witnesses to respond to opioid overdose events. However, the ‘evidence base’ for peer-administered naloxone has become a key point of contention. This contention opens up critical questions about how knowledge (‘evidence’) is constituted and validated in drug policy processes, which voices may be heard, and how knowledge producers secure privileged positions of influence. Taking the debate surrounding peer-administered naloxone as a case study, and drawing on qualitative interviews with individuals (n = 19) involved in the development of naloxone policy in Australia, we examine how particular kinds of knowledge are rendered ‘useful’ in drug policy debates. Applying Bacchi’s poststructuralist approach to policy analysis, we argue that taken-for-granted ‘truths’ implicit within evidence-based policy discourse privilege particular kinds of ‘objective’ and ‘rational’ knowledge and, in so doing, legitimate the voices of researchers and clinicians to the exclusion of others. What appears to be a simple requirement for methodological rigour in the evidence-based policy paradigm actually rests on deeper assumptions which place limits around not only what can be said (in terms of what kind of knowledge is relevant for policy debate) but also who may legitimately speak. However, the accounts offered by participants reveal the ways in which a larger number of ways of knowing are already co-habiting within drug policy. Despite these opportunities for re-problematisation and resistance, the continued mobilisation of ‘evidence-based’ discourse obscures these contesting positions and continues to privilege particular speakers.

Drug Toxicity Deaths after Release from Incarceration in Ontario, 2006-2013: Review of Coroner's Cases

Background

There is an increased risk of death due to drug toxicity after release from incarceration. The purpose of this study was to describe the timing, rate and circumstances of drug toxicity deaths following release from incarceration. This information can be used to help design potential preventive interventions.

Methods and Findings

We reviewed coroner’s files to identify deaths in adults in Ontario between 2006 and 2013 caused by drug toxicity (n = 6,978) and these records were matched with provincial correctional records to identify individuals who died within one year of being released from incarceration (n = 702). Twenty percent (n = 137) of the 702 deaths occurred within one week of release. The majority (77%, n = 538) of deaths after release involved one or more opioids. Of the deaths involving opioids, intervention by another person may have been possible in 318 cases.

Conclusions

Between 2006 and 2013 in Ontario, one in ten drug toxicity deaths in adults occurred within one year of release from provincial incarceration. These findings may help to inform the implemention and assessment of interventions aimed at reducing drug toxicity deaths following release from incarceration.

Community reentry challenges after release from prison among people who inject drugs in St. Petersburg, Russia

PURPOSE

Little is known about the context of the post-release risk environment among formerly incarcerated people who inject drugs (PWID) in Russia. The purpose of this paper is to explore these challenges as they relate to reentry, relapse to injection opioid use, and overdose.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The authors conducted 25 in-depth semi-structured interviews among PWID living in St Petersburg, Russia who had been incarcerated within the past two years. Participants were recruited from street outreach (n=20) and a drug treatment center (n=5).

FINDINGS

Emergent themes related to the post-release environment included financial instability, negative interactions with police, return to a drug using community, and reuniting with drug using peers. Many respondents relapsed to opioid use immediately after release. Those whose relapse occurred weeks or months after their release expressed more motivation to resist. Alcohol or stimulant use often preceded the opioid relapse episode. Among those who overdosed, alcohol use was often reported prior to overdosing on opioids.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Future post-release interventions in Russia should effectively link PWID to social, medical, and harm reduction services. Particular attention should be focussed on helping former inmates find employment and overdose prevention training prior to leaving prison that should also cover the heightened risk of concomitant alcohol use.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

In addition to describing a syndemic involving the intersection of incarceration, injection drug use, poverty, and alcohol abuse, the findings can inform future interventions to address these interrelated public health challenges within the Russian setting.

Addressing perceptions of opiate-using prisoners to take-home naloxone: findings from one English region

Purpose

– The purpose of this paper is to understand prisoner perceptions on being trained and having received take-home naloxone (THN) kits once released from prison back into the community, in order to prevent an opiate-related overdose.

Design/methodology/approach

– A survey was run of all prisoners receiving THN training across ten prisons in one English region. In total, 142 prisoners were surveyed out of 206 (69 per cent) being trained in THN across the ten prisons. Five focus groups (n=26) with prisoners were conducted across four remand and one open prison that included discussions on THN within a range of topics. Discussions were recorded using short-hand and the data were subsequently thematically interpreted using visual mapping techniques.

Findings

– The survey highlighted a high degree of exposure amongst prisoners to overdose either directly (54 per cent) or having witnessed another person’s overdose (73 per cent). For prisoners who had overdosed, only a minority (38 per cent) were taken to hospital by an ambulance. In total, 81 per cent of prisoners surveyed also expressed little or no knowledge about THN prior to training. Prisoners were resistant to THN as an intervention resulting from this lack of prior knowledge. Focus group interviews suggested that there was a confused and mixed message in providing a harm reduction initiative within the context of recovery-orientated treatment. Prisoners also exhibited name confusion with other drugs (naltrexone) and there was some degree of resistance to being trained based on perceived side-effects brought on by its administration. Prisoners were also acutely aware of official agency perceptions (e.g. police) if seen to be in possession of THN kits.

Practical implications

– The distribution of THN within a custodial setting requires consideration of wider marketing approaches to address levels of confusion and misapprehension amongst prisoners.

Originality/value

– The study is one of the few focused on THN based on a UK prison environment.

Engagement in a National Naloxone Programme among people who inject drugs

BACKGROUND

Availability of the opioid antagonist naloxone for lay administration has grown substantially since first proposed in 1996. Gaps remain, though, in our understanding of how people who inject drugs (PWID) engage with naloxone programmes over time.

AIMS

This paper aimed to address three specific evidence gaps: the extent of naloxone supply to PWID; supply-source (community or prisons); and the carriage of naloxone among PWID.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analysis of Scotland's Needle Exchange Surveillance Initiative (NESI) responses in 2011-2012 and 2013-2014 was undertaken with a specific focus on the extent of Scotland's naloxone supply to PWID; including by source (community or prisons); and on the carriage of naloxone. Differences in responses between the two surveys were measured using Chi-square tests together with 95% confidence intervals for rate-differences over time.

RESULTS

The proportion of NESI participants who reported that they had been prescribed naloxone within the last year increased significantly from 8% (175/2146; 95% CI: 7-9%) in 2011-2012 to 32% (745/2331; 95% CI: 30% to 34%) in 2013-2014. In contrast, the proportion of NESI participants who carried naloxone with them on the day they were interviewed decreased significantly from 16% (27/169; 95% CI: 10% to 22%) in 2011-2012 to 5% (39/741; 95% CI: 4% to 7%) in 2013-2014.

CONCLUSIONS

The supply of naloxone to PWID has increased significantly since the introduction of a National Naloxone Programme in Scotland in January 2011. In contrast, naloxone carriage is low and decreased between the two NESI surveys; this area requires further investigation.

Effectiveness of Scotland's National Naloxone Programme for reducing opioid-related deaths: a before (2006-10) versus after (2011-13) comparison

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness for Scotland's National Naloxone Programme (NNP) by comparison between 2006-10 (before) and 2011-13 (after NNP started in January 2011) and to assess cost-effectiveness.

DESIGN

This was a pre-post evaluation of a national policy. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by prescription costs against life-years gained per opioid-related death (ORD) averted.

SETTING

Scotland, in community settings and all prisons.

INTERVENTION

Brief training and standardized naloxone supply became available to individuals at risk of opioid overdose.

MEASUREMENTS

ORDs as identified by National Records of Scotland. Look-back determined the proportion of ORDs who, in the 4 weeks before ORD, had been (i) released from prison (primary outcome) and (ii) released from prison or discharged from hospital (secondary). We report 95% confidence intervals for effectiveness in reducing the primary (and secondary) outcome in 2011-13 versus 2006-10. Prescription costs were assessed against 1 or 10 life-years gained per averted ORD.

FINDINGS

In 2006-10, 9.8% of ORDs (193 of 1970) were in people released from prison within 4 weeks of death, whereas only 6.3% of ORDs in 2011-13 followed prison release (76 of 1212, P < 0.001; this represented a difference of 3.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.6-5.4%)]. This reduction in the proportion of prison release ORDs translates into 42 fewer prison release ORDs (95% CI = 19-65) during 2011-13, when 12,000 naloxone kits were issued at current prescription cost of £225,000. Scotland's secondary outcome reduced from 19.0 to 14.9%, a difference of 4.1% (95% CI = 1.4-6.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Scotland's National Naloxone Programme, which started in 2011, was associated with a 36% reduction in the proportion of opioid-related deaths that occurred in the 4 weeks following release from prison.

Mortality over 12 years of follow-up in people admitted to provincial custody in Ontario: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to define rates and causes of death in custody and after release in people admitted to provincial custody in Ontario, and to compare these data with data for the general population.

METHODS

We linked data on adults admitted to provincial custody in Ontario in 2000 with data on deaths between 2000 and 2012. We examined rates and causes of death by age, sex, custodial status and period after release, and compared them with data for the general population, using indirect adjustment for age.

RESULTS

Between 2000 and 2012, 8.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.3%-8.8%) of those incarcerated died in provincial custody or after release. The crude death rate was 7.1 (95% CI 6.9-7.3) per 1000 person-years. The standardized mortality ratio for those incarcerated in 2000 was 4.0 (95% CI 3.9-4.1) overall and 1.9 (95% CI 1.5-2.4) while in provincial custody. The most common causes of death were injury and poisoning (38.2% of all deaths), including overdose (13.6%) and suicide (8.2%), diseases of the circulatory system (15.8%) and neoplasms (14.5%). In the 2 weeks after release, the standardized mortality ratio was 5.7 overall and 56.0 for overdose. Life expectancy was 72.3 years for women and 73.4 for men who experienced incarceration in 2000.

INTERPRETATION

Mortality was high for people who experienced incarceration, and life expectancy was 4.2 years less for men and 10.6 years less for women compared with the general population. Efforts should be made to reduce the gap in mortality between people who experience incarceration and those who do not. Time in custody could serve as an opportunity to intervene to decrease risk.

Mortality over 12 years of follow-up in people admitted to provincial custody in Ontario: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to define rates and causes of death in custody and after release in people admitted to provincial custody in Ontario, and to compare these data with data for the general population.

METHODS

We linked data on adults admitted to provincial custody in Ontario in 2000 with data on deaths between 2000 and 2012. We examined rates and causes of death by age, sex, custodial status and period after release, and compared them with data for the general population, using indirect adjustment for age.

RESULTS

Between 2000 and 2012, 8.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.3%-8.8%) of those incarcerated died in provincial custody or after release. The crude death rate was 7.1 (95% CI 6.9-7.3) per 1000 person-years. The standardized mortality ratio for those incarcerated in 2000 was 4.0 (95% CI 3.9-4.1) overall and 1.9 (95% CI 1.5-2.4) while in provincial custody. The most common causes of death were injury and poisoning (38.2% of all deaths), including overdose (13.6%) and suicide (8.2%), diseases of the circulatory system (15.8%) and neoplasms (14.5%). In the 2 weeks after release, the standardized mortality ratio was 5.7 overall and 56.0 for overdose. Life expectancy was 72.3 years for women and 73.4 for men who experienced incarceration in 2000.

INTERPRETATION

Mortality was high for people who experienced incarceration, and life expectancy was 4.2 years less for men and 10.6 years less for women compared with the general population. Efforts should be made to reduce the gap in mortality between people who experience incarceration and those who do not. Time in custody could serve as an opportunity to intervene to decrease risk.

Clinical risk factors for death after release from prison in Washington State: a nested case-control study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

While mortality rates after prison release are high, little is known about clinical risk factors for death. We sought to identify risk and protective factors for all-cause and accidental poisoning (overdose) death.

DESIGN

Nested case-control study of people released from prison.

SETTING

Washington State Department of Corrections, Washington, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Cases (699 all-cause deaths, of which 88 were among women, and 196 additional overdose deaths, of which 76 were among women) between 1999 and 2009 matched 1 : 1 to controls on sex, age and year of release using risk set sampling.

MEASUREMENTS

Prison medical charts were abstracted for clinical information. Independent associations between clinical characteristics and all-cause and overdose mortality were assessed using conditional logistic regression.

FINDINGS

Key independent risk factors for all-cause mortality included homelessness [odds ratio (OR) = 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.06, 2.23], injection drug use (OR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.16, 2.06), tobacco use (OR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.07, 2.13), cirrhosis (OR = 4.42, 95% CI = 1.63, 11.98) and psychiatric medications before release (OR = 2.38, 95% CI = 1.71, 3.30). Independent risk factors for overdose mortality included substance use disorder (OR = 2.33, 95% CI = 1.32, 4.11), injection drug use (OR = 2.43, 95% CI = 1.53, 3.86), panic disorder (OR = 3.87, 95% CI = 1.62, 9.21), psychiatric prescriptions before release (OR = 2.44, 95% CI = 1.55, 3.85) and problems with opiates/sedatives (OR = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.40, 5.63). Substance use disorder treatment during the index incarceration was protective for all-cause (OR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.49, 0.91) and overdose (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.36, 0.90) mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Injection drug use and substance use disorders are risk factors for death after release from prison. In-prison substance use disorder treatment services may reduce the risk.

Stakeholder perceptions and operational barriers in the training and distribution of take-home naloxone within prisons in England

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to assess potential barriers and challenges to the implementation of take-home naloxone (THN) across ten prisons in one region of England.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews deploying a grounded theory approach were utilised over a 12- to 18-month period that included an on-going structured dialogue with strategic and operational prison staff from the ten prisons and other key stakeholders (n = 17). Prisoner perceptions were addressed through four purposive focus groups belonging to different establishments (n = 26). Document analysis also included report minutes and access to management information and local performance reports. The data were thematically interpreted using visual mapping techniques.

RESULTS

The distribution and implementation of THN in a prison setting was characterised by significant barriers and challenges. As a result, four main themes were identified: a wide range of negative and confused perceptions of THN amongst prison staff and prisoners; inherent difficulties with the identification and engagement of eligible prisoners; the need to focus on individual prison processes to enhance the effective distribution of THN; and the need for senior prison staff engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

The distribution of THN within a custodial setting requires consideration of a number of important factors which are discussed.

A Review of Opportunities to Improve the Health of People Involved in the Criminal Justice System in the United States

In the past decade, many constituencies have questioned the efficacy, cost, and unintended consequences of mass incarceration in the United States. Although substantial evidence now demonstrates that US incarceration policies have had unintended adverse health consequences, we know less about the strategies and policies that can prevent or reduce these problems for justice-involved individuals and how the criminal justice system (CJS) can contribute to the Healthy People 2020 national goal of eliminating inequities in health. This review examines strategies that have been used to improve the health of people at various stages of CJS involvement, including diversion from jail and prison stays into community settings, improvements to the social and physical environments within correctional facilities, provision of health and other services to inmates, assistance for people leaving correctional facilities to make the transition back to the community, and systems coordination and integration.

Health behaviors of young adult heroin injectors in the Seattle area

BACKGROUND

Recent indicators point to substantial increases in the number of young heroin users across much of the United States as well as across Washington State. This study characterizes this younger generation of heroin injectors in order to inform public health responses.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using street-intercept surveys at King County, WA syringe exchange programs in 2013. Survey responses were restricted to heroin injectors (n=389) and then categorized by the participant's age (<30 and ≥30) for a descriptive epidemiological analysis. A manual stepwise logistic regression tested the independent relationship of user characteristics with being under the age of 30.

RESULTS

In regression analyses, adjusting for other characteristics, young adults were significantly (p<0.05) more likely to: re-use syringes 2-4 times (OR=2.28 compared to those who used a syringe once), share syringes (OR=2.92), report they were "hooked on" prescription-type opioids prior to using heroin (OR=2.54), have had a sexual partner in the prior year (opposite sex OR=7.37, same sex OR=23.29, both genders OR=22.04), and report powder cocaine use in the prior 3 months (OR=2.49) compared to those ages 30 and older. Young adults were significantly less likely to report using pain medicines (OR=0.33), having an abscess in the prior year (OR=0.33) or having tested positive for hepatitis C (OR=0.22) than older adults adjusting for other variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Younger heroin injectors engage in risky injection practices more than older heroin injectors. Along with other significant differences, these findings have implications for outreach programs and medical care for younger heroin injectors.

A cross-sectional study of correlates of imprisonment in opioid-dependent men and women in New South Wales, Australia

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Involvement in the criminal justice system is common among opioid-dependent people. This study aimed to determine prevalence and adolescent-onset correlates of adult imprisonment among opioid-dependent men and women in New South Wales, Australia.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Participants were recruited from opioid substitution therapy clinics and completed a face-to-face, structured interview. Data were collected on demographic characteristics, family history, substance dependence and psychiatric disorders. Adolescent-onset correlates of adult incarceration (including interactions with gender) were examined using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Opioid-dependent men were significantly more likely than opioid-dependent women to report adult imprisonment (66% vs 40%; P < 0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression model, older age, male gender, having completed high school education only, having dependent children or living independently prior to age 18 years, a history of juvenile detention and adolescent-onset opioid dependence were all significantly associated with increased odds of adult imprisonment. Adolescent-onset depression was associated with a halving of odds of adult imprisonment. The only variable for which we observed an interaction with gender was juvenile detention, which had a significantly greater impact on the odds of imprisonment for men than women.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

More than half of this sample of opioid dependent adults had a history of imprisonment. Variables that are associated with imprisonment in the general population, such as childhood maltreatment, were not important in predicting imprisonment in this sample. Further study is required to understand the interaction between sex and juvenile detention in predicting adult imprisonment. [Larney S, Cama E, Nelson E, Larance B, Degenhardt L. A cross-sectional study of correlates of imprisonment in opioid-dependent men and women in New South Wales, Australia. Drug Alcohol Rev 2016;35:686-692].

Drugs-Related Death Soon after Hospital-Discharge among Drug Treatment Clients in Scotland: Record Linkage, Validation, and Investigation of Risk-Factors

We validate that the 28 days after hospital-discharge are high-risk for drugs-related death (DRD) among drug users in Scotland and investigate key risk-factors for DRDs soon after hospital-discharge. Using data from an anonymous linkage of hospitalisation and death records to the Scottish Drugs Misuse Database (SDMD), including over 98,000 individuals registered for drug treatment during 1 April 1996 to 31 March 2010 with 705,538 person-years, 173,107 hospital-stays, and 2,523 DRDs. Time-at-risk of DRD was categorised as: during hospitalization, within 28 days, 29–90 days, 91 days–1 year, >1 year since most recent hospital discharge versus ‘never admitted’. Factors of interest were: having ever injected, misuse of alcohol, length of hospital-stay (0–1 versus 2+ days), and main discharge-diagnosis. We confirm SDMD clients’ high DRD-rate soon after hospital-discharge in 2006–2010. DRD-rate in the 28 days after hospital-discharge did not vary by length of hospital-stay but was significantly higher for clients who had ever-injected versus otherwise. Three leading discharge-diagnoses accounted for only 150/290 DRDs in the 28 days after hospital-discharge, but ever-injectors for 222/290. Hospital-discharge remains a period of increased DRD-vulnerability in 2006–2010, as in 1996–2006, especially for those with a history of injecting.

More than just someone to inject drugs with: Injecting within primary injection partnerships

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown intimate injection partners engage in higher rates of syringe and injecting equipment sharing. We examined the drug use context and development of injection drug use behaviors within intimate injection partnerships.

METHODS

In-depth interviews (n=18) were conducted with both members of nine injecting partnerships in Sydney, Australia. Content analysis identified key domains related to the reasons for injecting with a primary injection partner and development of drug injection patterns.

MAIN FINDINGS

Most partnerships (n=5) were also sexual; three were blood-relatives and one a friend dyad. The main drug injected was heroin (66%) with high rates of recent sharing behaviors (88%) reported within dyads. Injecting within a primary injection partnership provided perceived protection against overdose events, helped reduce stress, increased control over when, where, and how drugs were used, and promoted the development of an injecting pattern where responsibilities could be shared. Unique to injecting within primary injection partnerships was the social connection and companionship resulted in a feeling of fulfillment while also blinding one from recognizing risky behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings illuminated the tension between protection and risks within primary injection partnerships. Primary injection partnerships provide a potential platform to expand risk reduction strategies.

Are overdoses treated by ambulance services an opportunity for additional interventions? A prospective cohort study

AIMS

To assess whether people who inject drugs (PWID) and who are treated for overdose by ambulance services have a greater mortality risk compared with other PWID, and to compare mortality risk within potentially critical time-periods (1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years) after an overdose attendance with the mortality risk within potentially non-critical time-periods (time before and/or after critical periods).

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Oslo, Norway.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 172 PWID street-recruited in 1997 and followed-up until the end of 2004.

MEASUREMENTS

Interview data linked to data from ambulance records, Norwegian Correctional Services, Opioid Substitution Treatment records and National Cause of Death Registry. Separate Cox regression models (one for each critical time-period) were estimated.

FINDINGS

Ambulance services treated 54% of the participants for an overdose during follow-up. The mortality rate was 2.8 per 100 person-years for those with an overdose and 3.3 for those without; the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 1.3 (95% CI = 0.6, 2.6, P = 0.482). Mortality risk was greater in all but the shortest critical time-period following ambulance attendance than in the non-critical periods. The mortality risk remained significantly elevated during critical periods, even when adjusted for total time spent in prison and substitution treatment. The HR ranged from 9.4 (95% CI = 3.5, 25.4) in the month after an overdose to 13.9 (95% CI = 6.4, 30.2) in the 5-year period.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality risk among people who inject drugs is significantly greater in time-periods after an overdose attendance than outside these time-periods.

Impact of opioid substitution therapy for Scotland's prisoners on drug-related deaths soon after prisoner release

AIM

To assess whether the introduction of a prison-based opioid substitution therapy (OST) policy was associated with a reduction in drug-related deaths (DRD) within 14 days after prison release.

DESIGN

Linkage of Scotland's prisoner database with death registrations to compare periods before (1996-2002) and after (2003-07) prison-based OST was introduced.

SETTING

All Scottish prisons.

PARTICIPANTS

People released from prison between 1 January 1996 and 8 October 2007 following an imprisonment of at least 14 days and at least 14 weeks after the preceding qualifying release.

MEASUREMENTS

Risk of DRD in the 12 weeks following release; percentage of these DRDs which occurred during the first 14 days.

FINDINGS

Before prison-based OST (1996-2002), 305 DRDs occurred in the 12 weeks after 80 200 qualifying releases, 3.8 per 1000 releases [95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.4-4.2]; of these, 175 (57%) occurred in the first 14 days. After the introduction of prison-based OST (2003-07), 154 DRDs occurred in the 12 weeks after 70 317 qualifying releases, a significantly reduced rate of 2.2 per 1000 releases (95% CI = 1.8-2.5). However, there was no change in the proportion which occurred in the first 14 days, either for all DRDs (87: 56%) or for opioid-related DRDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the introduction of a prison-based opioid substitution therapy (OST) policy in Scotland, the rate of drug-related deaths in the 12 weeks following release fell by two-fifths. However, the proportion of deaths that occurred in the first 14 days did not change appreciably, suggesting that in-prison OST does not reduce early deaths after release.

High uptake of naloxone-based overdose prevention training among previously incarcerated syringe-exchange program participants

BACKGROUND

Incarceration is common among people who inject drugs. Prior research has shown that incarceration is a marker of elevated risk for opioid overdose, suggesting that the criminal justice system may be an important, under-utilized venue for implementing overdose prevention strategies. To better understand the feasibility and acceptability of such strategies, we evaluated the utilization of naloxone-based overdose prevention training among people who inject drugs with and without a history of incarceration.

METHODS

We surveyed clients who utilize a multi-site syringe exchange program (SEP) in 2 cities in the Midwestern United States. Participants completed an 88-item, computerized survey assessing history of incarceration, consequences associated with injection, injecting practices, and uptake of harm reduction strategies.

RESULTS

Among 543 respondents who injected drugs in the prior 30 days, 243 (43%) reported prior incarceration. Comparing those with and without a history of incarceration, there were no significant differences with respect to age, gender, or race. Those who observed an overdose, experienced overdose, and received training to administer or have administered naloxone were more likely to report incarceration. Overall, 69% of previously incarcerated clients had been trained to administer naloxone.

CONCLUSION

People who inject drugs with a history of incarceration appear to have a higher risk of opioid overdose than those never incarcerated, and are more willing to utilize naloxone as an overdose prevention strategy. Naloxone training and distribution is an important component of comprehensive prevention services for persons with opioid use disorders. Expansion of services for persons leaving correctional facilities should be considered.

Reducing Fatal Opioid Overdose: Prevention, Treatment and Harm Reduction Strategies

The opioid overdose epidemic is a major threat to the public's health, resulting in the development and implementation of a variety of strategies to reduce fatal overdose. Many strategies are focused on primary prevention and increased access to effective treatment, although the past decade has seen an exponential increase in harm reduction initiatives. To maximize identification of opportunities for intervention, initiatives focusing on prevention, access to effective treatment, and harm reduction are examined independently, although considerable overlap exists. Particular attention is given to harm reduction approaches, as increased public and political will have facilitated widespread implementation of several initiatives, including increased distribution of naloxone and policy changes designed to increase bystander assistance during a witnessed overdose.

Incidence and predictors of non-fatal drug overdose after release from prison among people who inject drugs in Queensland, Australia

INTRODUCTION

Release from prison is a period of elevated risk for drug-related harms, particularly among people who inject drugs (PWID). Non-fatal overdose can cause serious morbidity and predicts future fatal overdose, however neither the incidence nor the risk factors for non-fatal overdose following release from prison are well understood.

METHODS

Structured health-related interviews were conducted with 1051 adult prisoners in Queensland, Australia prior to release and approximately 1, 3 and 6 months post-release. Incidence of self-reported overdose in the community was calculated for PWID and all prisoners for three discrete time periods. Negative binomial regression with robust error variance was used to identify pre-release predictors of overdose among PWID.

RESULTS

The incidence of reported overdose was highest between 1 and 3 months post-release (37.8 per 100 person-years (PY) among PWID; 24.5/100 PY among all ex-prisoners). In adjusted analyses, the risk of post-release non-fatal overdose was higher for PWID who reported: being unemployed for >6 months before prison, having been removed from family as a child, at least weekly use of benzodiazepines and/or pharmaceutical opiates in the 3 months prior to prison, and ever receiving opioid substitution therapy (OST). Pre-release psychological distress and a lifetime history of mental disorder also predicted overdose, whereas risky alcohol use in the year before prison was protective.

CONCLUSIONS

PWID have a high risk of overdose following release from prison. Imprisonment is an opportunity to initiate targeted preventive interventions such as OST, overdose prevention training and peer-delivered naloxone for those with a high risk profile.

Griffith Edwards, the Addiction Research Unit and research on the criminal justice system

BACKGROUND

This paper reviews the early work of Griffith Edwards and his colleagues on alcohol in the criminal justice system and outlines the direction of research in this area in the Addiction Research Unit in the 1960s and 1970s. The paper outlines the link between that work and work undertaken in the more recent past in this area.

METHODS

The key papers of the authors are reviewed and the impact of this work on policy and practice is discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a rich seam of work on deprived and incarcerated populations that has been under way at the Addiction Research Unit and subsequently the National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, London. Griffith Edwards initiated this work that explores the risks and problems experienced by people moving between the health and criminal justice system, and demonstrated the need for better care and continuity across this system.