The role of safer injection facilities in the response to HIV/AIDS among injection drug users

Radical hospitality: Innovative programming to build community and meet the needs of people who use drugs at a government-sanctioned overdose prevention site in San Francisco, California

BACKGROUND

The Tenderloin Center (TLC), a multi-service center where people could receive or be connected to basic needs, behavioral health care, housing, and medical services, was open in San Francisco for 46 weeks in 2022. Within a week of operation, services expanded to include an overdose prevention site (OPS), also known as safe consumption site. OPSs have operated internationally for over three decades, but government-sanctioned OPSs have only recently been implemented in the United States. We used ethnographic methods to understand the ways in which a sanctioned OPS, situated in a multi-service center, impacts the lives of people who use drugs (PWUD).

METHODS

We conducted participant observation and in-depth interviews June-December 2022. Extensive field notes and 39 in-depth interviews with 24 TLC guests and 15 TLC staff were analyzed using an inductive analysis approach. Interviewees were asked detailed questions about their experiences using and working at the TLC.

RESULTS

TLC guests and staff described an atmosphere where radical hospitality-welcoming guests with extraordinary warmth, generosity, and unconditional acceptance-was central to the culture. We found that the co-location of an OPS within a multi-service agency (1) allowed for the culture of radical hospitality to flourish, (2) yielded a convenient one-stop shop model, (3) created a space for community building, and (4) offered safety and respite to guests.

CONCLUSIONS

The co-location of an OPS within a multi-service drop-in center is an important example of how such an organization can build positive sociality among PWUD while protecting autonomy and reducing overdose mortality. Overdose response and reversal is an act of relational accountability in which friends, peers, and even strangers intervene to protect and revive one another. This powerful intervention was operationalized as an anti-oppressive, horizontal activity through radical hospitality with a built environment that allowed PWUD to be both social and safe.

Implementation and sustainability of safe consumption sites: a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis

BACKGROUND

Safe consumption sites (SCSs) serve diverse populations of people who use drugs (PWUD) and public health objectives. SCS implementation began in the 1980s, and today, there are at least 200 known SCSs operating in over twelve countries. While a growing literature supports their effectiveness as a harm reduction strategy, there is limited information on contextual factors that may support or hinder SCS implementation and sustainability. We aimed to fill this gap in knowledge by reviewing existing qualitative studies on SCSs.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. We identified all peer-reviewed, English-language qualitative studies on SCSs containing original data in PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Science Direct as of September 23, 2019. Two authors independently screened, abstracted, and coded content relating to SCS implementation and sustainment aligned with the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) implementation science framework.

RESULTS

After removing duplicates, we identified 765 unique records, of which ten qualitative studies met inclusion criteria for our synthesis. Across these ten studies, 236 total interviews were conducted. Overall, studies described how SCSs can (1) keep drug use out of public view while fostering a sense of inclusion for participants, (2) support sustainment by enhancing external communities' acceptability of SCSs, and (3) encourage PWUD utilization. Most studies also described how involving PWUD and peer workers (i.e., those with lived experience) in SCS operation supported implementation and sustainability.

DISCUSSION

Our thematic synthesis of qualitative literature identified engagement of PWUD and additional factors that appear to support SCS planning and operations and are critical to implementation success. However, the existing qualitative literature largely lacked perspectives of SCS staff and other community members who might be able to provide additional insight into factors influencing the implementation and sustainability of this promising public health intervention.

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

BACKGROUND

Drug 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.

PURPOSE

To conduct, with a systematic approach, a literature review, of published peer-reviewed literature assessing the long-term impacts of DCRs/SIFs.

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

Four 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.

CONCLUSION

Long-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.

Drogennotfälle und medizinische Überlebenshilfe in Frankfurter Drogenkonsumräumen

Dieser Artikel präsentiert die zentralen Ergebnisse der quantitativen und qualitativen Querschnittsstudie „Notfälle in den Frankfurter Drogenkonsumräumen – Strategien in der Überlebenshilfe“, die im Dezember 2020 vom Frankfurter Institut für Suchtforschung (ISFF) durchgeführt wurde. Die Studie basiert auf einer erweiterten statistischen Analyse der Notfalldaten der Frankfurter Drogenkonsumraum-Dokumentation des Jahres 2019 sowie einer qualitativen und quantitativen Analyse des Schichtbuches des Drogenkonsumraums „Niddastraße“. Der Schwerpunkt des Artikels liegt auf der Beschreibung der registrierten drogeninduzierten und nicht-drogeninduzierten Notfälle, den vom Team getroffenen Interventionsmaßnahmen und auf der Analyse von involvierten Substanzen und konsumbedingten Risikofaktoren. Abschließend werden mögliche Weiterentwicklungen zu existierenden Angeboten dargestellt und kritisch diskutiert.

The print media's construction of the 'drug problem' in Victorian newspapers: The case of North Richmond Community Health's medically supervised injecting room

INTRODUCTION

The media's influence on policy has been widely documented. This study sought to investigate how Melbourne's medically supervised injecting room (MSIR) was represented in the print media.

METHODS

A qualitative discourse analysis of Victorian print media (n = 441 items) representation of MSIR was conducted. Constructivist Grounded Theory guided the sampling strategy and coding while the discourse analysis was informed by Bacchi's approach to policy analysis, 'What's the problem represented to be?'. Print news media was gathered from Factiva and Newsbank databases from January 2016 to June 2020.

RESULTS

The media's representation of the 'drug problem' of overdose was identified by a range of actors in support and opposition of the facility. In attributing the concept of 'drug use' to the 'drug problem' items most frequently suggest it is the 'choice' of the individual to inject illicit drugs. The voices of people who inject drugs (PWID) were largely silenced in the print news media and to re-conceptualise the 'drug problem' to be a 'health problem' would aid in the support for the harm reduction strategy. The research highlighted 'dividing practices' (residents vs. PWID) and the portrayal of PWID that translate to the lived effects of PWID.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The print news media did not directly influence the establishment of the Melbourne MSIR. However, the representation of PWID in the print media must be further investigated for the successful establishment of future harm reduction strategies.

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

OBJECTIVES

People 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 Canada addressing the prevention and management of infectious disease in PWID.

DESIGN

This study employed a systematic integrative review methodology. Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection) and relevant websites were searched for literature published between 2008 and 2019 (last search date was 6 June 2019). Eligible articles and documents were required to address injection or intravenous drug use and health programmes or services relating to the prevention or management of infectious diseases in Canada.

RESULTS

This study identified 1607 unique articles and 97 were included in this study. The health programmes and services identified included testing and management of HIV and hepatitis C virus (n=27), supervised injection facilities (n=19), medication treatment for opioid use disorder (n=12), integrated infectious disease and addiction programmes (n=10), needle exchange programmes (n=9), harm reduction strategies broadly (n=6), mobile care initiatives (n=5), peer-delivered services (n=3), management of IDU-related bacterial infections (n=2) and others (n=4). Key implications for policy, practice and future research were identified based on the results of the included studies, which include addressing individual and systemic factors that impede care, furthering evaluation of programmes and the need to provide comprehensive care to PWID, involving medical care, social support and harm reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate the need for expanded services across a variety of settings and populations. Our study emphasises the importance of addressing social and structural factors that impede infectious disease care for PWID. Further research is needed to improve evaluation of health programmes and services and contextual factors surrounding accessing services or returning to care.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020142947.

Association of skin infections with sharing of injection drug preparation equipment among people who inject drugs

BACKGROUND

Sharing needles and injection drug preparation equipment (IDPE) among people who inject drugs (PWID) are well-established risk factors for viral transmission. Shared needles and IDPE may serve as bacterial niduses for skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI). Given the rising rates of SSTI in PWID, we investigated the association of needle and IDPE sharing on incidence of SSTI in a cohort of PWID.

METHODS

Inpatient PWID (N = 252) were recruited to a randomized controlled trial of an intervention aimed at reducing infections. The primary outcome was self-reported incidence of SSTI one-year post-hospitalization. In this secondary analysis, we assessed two variables: 1) sharing of IDPE alone, 2) sharing needles with or without IDPE, and compared these groups separately to persons who reported no sharing of needles or IDPE via a mixed-effects negative binomial regression model to estimate the effect of baseline sharing behavior on SSTI during follow-up via incidence rate ratios (IRR).

RESULTS

Participant characteristics: 38 years [mean], 58% male, 60% White, 90% primarily injected opioids, 1.58 (± 2.35) mean SSTI in the year prior to baseline. In terms of sharing behavior, 29% didn't share needles or IDPE, 13% shared IDPE only, and 58% shared needles with or without IDPE three months prior to baseline. After adjusting for co-variables, PWID who shared IDPE alone had a 2.2 fold higher IRR of SSTI (95%CI 1.27; 3.85, p = 0.005) and PWID who shared needles with or without IDPE had a 3.31 fold higher IRR of SSTI (95%CI 2.04; 5.37, p < 0.001), compared to those who did not share any equipment. The number of SSTI at baseline was associated with an IRR of 1.20 of SSTI during follow-up (95%CI 1.09; 1.32, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of hospitalized PWID, we found a significant association between baseline sharing of IDPE alone and of sharing of needles with or without IDPE with one-year incidence of SSTI.

Community perspectives on supervised consumption sites: Insights from four U.S. counties deeply affected by opioids

BACKGROUND

To address the overdose crisis in the United States, expert groups have been nearly unanimous in calls for increasing access to evidence-based treatment and overdose reversal drugs. In some places there have also been calls for implementing supervised consumption sites (SCSs). Some cities-primarily in coastal urban areas-have explored the feasibility and acceptability of introducing them. However, the perspectives of community stakeholders from more inland and rural areas that have also been hard hit by opioids are largely missing from the literature.

METHODS

To examine community attitudes about implementing SCSs for people who use opioids (PWUO) in areas with acute opioid problems, the research team conducted in-depth interviews and focus groups in four counties: Ashtabula and Cuyahoga Counties in Ohio, and Carroll and Hillsborough Counties in New Hampshire, two states with high rates of opioid overdose. Participants were policy, treatment, and criminal justice professionals, frontline harm reduction and service providers, and PWUO.

RESULTS

Key informants noted benefits to SCSs, but also perceived potential drawbacks such as that they may enable opioid use, and potential practical barriers, including lack of desire among PWUO to travel to an SCS after purchasing opioids and fear of arrest. Key informants generally believed their communities likely would not currently accept SCSs due to cultural, resource, and practical barriers. They viewed publication of evidence on SCSs and community education as essential for fostering acceptance.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite cultural and other barriers, implementation of SCSs may be more feasible in urban communities with existing (and perhaps more long-standing) harm reduction programs, greater treatment resources, and adequate transportation, particularly if there is strong evidence to support them.

The opioid crisis and HIV in the USA: deadly synergies

The opioid epidemic is one of the greatest public health problems that the USA faces. Opioid overdose death rates have increased steadily for more than a decade and doubled in 2013-17, as the highly potent synthetic opioid fentanyl entered the drug supply. Demographics of new HIV diagnoses among people who inject drugs are also changing, with more new HIV diagnoses occurring among White people, young people (aged 13-34 years), and people who reside outside large central metropolitan areas. Racial differences also exist in syringe sharing, which decreased among Black people and Hispanic people but remained unchanged among White people in 2005-15. Recent HIV outbreaks have occurred in rural areas of the USA, as well as among marginalised people in urban areas with robust HIV prevention and treatment services (eg, Seattle, WA). Multiple evidence-based interventions can effectively treat opioid use disorder and prevent HIV acquisition. However, considerable barriers exist precluding delivery of these solutions to many people who inject drugs. If the USA is serious about HIV prevention among this group, stigma must be eliminated, discriminatory policies must change, and comprehensive health care must be accessible to all. Finally, root causes of the opioid epidemic such as hopelessness need to be identified and addressed.

Between Emergency Department Visits: The Role of Harm Reduction Programs in Mitigating the Harms Associated With Injection Drug Use

Injection drug use is a major public health problem in the United States. Cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine are the most commonly injected illicit drugs, whereas opioids are responsible for the majority of overdose fatalities. Although recent emergency department (ED) efforts have focused on expanding capacity for buprenorphine induction for opioid use disorder treatment, the injection of illicit drugs carries specific health risks that require acknowledgment and management, particularly for patients who decline substance use treatment. Harm reduction is a public health approach that aims to reduce the harms associated with a health risk behavior, short of eliminating the behavior itself. Harm-reduction strategies fundamental to emergency medicine include naloxone distribution for opioid overdose. This clinical Review Article examines the specific health complications of injection drug use and reviews the evidence base for 2 interventions effective in reducing morbidity and mortality related to drug injection, irrespective of the specific drug used, that are less well known and infrequently leveraged by emergency medicine clinicians: syringe service programs and supervised injection facilities. In accordance with the recommendations of health authorities such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, emergency clinicians can promote the use of harm-reduction programs in the community to reduce viral transmission and other risks of injection drug use by providing patients with information about and referrals to these programs after injection drug use-related ED visits.

Supervised consumption sites: a nuanced assessment of the causal evidence

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Supervised consumption sites (SCS) operate in more than 10 countries. SCS have mostly emerged as a bottom-up response to crises, first to HIV/AIDS and now overdose deaths, in ways that make rigorous evaluation difficult. Opinions vary about how much favorable evidence must accumulate before implementation. Our aim was to assess the nature and quality of evidence on the consequences of implementing SCS.

METHODS

We reviewed the higher-quality SCS literature, focusing on articles evaluating natural experiments and mathematical modeling studies that estimate costs and benefits. We discuss the evidence through the lens of three types of decision-makers and from three intellectual perspectives.

RESULTS

Millions of drug use episodes have been supervised at SCS with no reported overdose deaths; however, uncertainties remain concerning the magnitude of the population-level effects. The published literature on SCS is large and almost unanimous in its support, but limited in nature and the number of sites evaluated. It can also overlook four key distinctions: (1) between outcomes that occur within the facility and possible spillover effects on behavior outside the SCS; (2) between effects of supervising consumption and the effects of other services offered, such as syringe or naloxone distribution; (3) between association and causation; and (4) between effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness of SCS compared to other interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The causal evidence for favorable outcomes of supervised consumption sites is minimal, but there appears to be little basis for concern about adverse effects. This raises the question of how context and priors can affect how high the bar is set when deciding whether to endorse supervised consumption sites. The literature also understates distinctions and nuances that need to be appreciated to gain a rich understanding of how a range of stakeholders should interpret and apply that evidence to a variety of decisions.

Drug consumption rooms: A systematic review of evaluation methodologies

ISSUES

Drug consumptions rooms (DCR) and supervised injecting facilities (SIF) are expanding internationally. Previous reviews have not systematically addressed evaluation methodologies.

APPROACH

Results from systematic searches of scientific databases in English until June 2017 were coded for paper type, country and year of publication. For evaluation papers, study outcome, methodology/study design and main indicators of DCR/SIF 'exposure' were recorded.

KEY FINDINGS

Two hundred and nineteen eligible peer-reviewed papers were published since 1999: the majority from Canada (n = 117 papers), Europe (n = 36) and Australia (n = 32). Fifty-six papers reported evaluation outcomes. Ecological study designs (n = 10) were used to assess the impact on overdose, public nuisance and crime; modelling techniques (n = 6) estimated impact on blood-borne diseases, overdose deaths and costs. Papers using individual-level data included four prospective cohorts (n = 28), cross-sectional surveys (n = 7) and service records (n = 5). Individual-level data were used to assess safer injecting practice, uptake into health and social services and all the other above outcomes except for impact on crime and costs. Four different indicators of DCR/SIF attendance were used to measure service 'exposure'.

IMPLICATIONS

Research around DCRs/SIFs has used ecological, modelling, cross-sectional and cohort study designs. Further research could involve systematic inclusion of a control group of people who are eligible but do not access SIFs, validation of self-reported proportion of injections at SIFs or a stepped-wedge or a cluster trial comparing localities.

CONCLUSIONS

Methodologies appropriate for DCR/SIF evaluation have been established and can be readily replicated from the existing literature. Research on operational aspects, implementation and transferability is also warranted.

Harm reduction in Italy: the experience of an unsanctioned supervised injection facility run by drug users

Purpose

Efforts to establish harm reduction interventions in Italy have persisted since the mid-1990s. Despite this, no sanctioned SIF has ever been implemented. The purpose of this paper is to provide information about a 10 year unsanctioned drug user-run SIF experience in Italy called Stanzetta.

Design/methodology/approach

The aim of the paper is to assess how Stanzetta met its objectives. Analysis was conducted compiling narrative accounts from the staff working in the NSP, which is adjacent to the Stanzetta, and conducting a simple frequency analysis of the available statistical data.

Findings

The Stanzetta unsanctioned SIF has been running for ten years and continues to be vulnerable due to its legal status. Being open 24 h/days has maximised its accessibility, but at the same time, it has encouraged a misuse of the Stanzetta. Although not trained, drug users became self-empowered to run the Stanzetta and to keep it clean, but the hygiene-health aspect is seen as one of the greatest challenges by the NSP professional staff. Over 10 years, not a single overdose death has been recorded. Drug use in the park has shifted from more visible places to the Stanzetta. As a result, the abandoned syringes have diminished in number and those disposed of correctly have increased. Moreover, no complaints from citizens or law enforcement were ever made. The neighbourhood acceptance seems to be the main goal of the peer-run unsanctioned SIF.

Research limitations/implications

The paper is based on a narrative account from the point of view of the professional staff involved, and results are specific to the context in which the study was conducted. Because of the chosen approach, the research results lack scientific generalisability. A relevant limitation is that no peer was involved in this study. Despite this, the research contributes to the information based on peer-run SIFs and makes a case for the de-medicalisation of SIFs in Europe.

Practical implications

This paper gives visibility to a long-lasting drug user-run SIF experience that was not made public mostly for an unclear legislative background about SIF in Italy.

Social implications

Efforts to establish harm reduction interventions in Italy have persisted since the mid-1990s and were undertaken primarily in response to epidemics of HIV infection and overdose (DPA, 2017). Despite this, no sanctioned SIF has ever been implemented. Primarily, this study wants to underline the urgency for an SIF pilot in Italy, and secondly the need to consider de-medicalising these services through direct support for peer-based models.

Originality/value

The Stanzetta unsanctioned SIF in Italy that has been running for ten years. Despite this, the venue continues to be vulnerable due to its legal status. For this reason, these results were never made public before. The experience showed a good working synergy between NSP professionals and the SIF peers. This model can be considered as a “light” de-medicalisation form to be explored and eventually to be implemented as a pilot SIF in Italy.

Drug consumption rooms (DCRs) as a setting to address hepatitis C - findings from an international online survey

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) among people who inject drugs (PWID) is high. Risky injecting behaviours have been found to decrease in drug consumption rooms (DCRs) and supervised injecting facilities (SIFs), yet HCV prevention and treatment in these settings have not been extensively explored.

METHODS

To determine the range and scope of HCV prevention and treatment options in these services, we assessed DCR/SIF operational features, their clients' characteristics and the HCV-related services they provide. A comprehensive online survey was sent to the managers of the 91 DCRs/SIFs that were operating globally as of September 2016. A descriptive cross-country analysis of the main DCR/SIF characteristics was conducted and bivariate logistic models were used to assess factors associated with enhanced HCV service provision.

RESULTS

Forty-nine valid responses were retrieved from DCRs/SIFs in all countries where they were established at the time of the survey (Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Switzerland). Internationally, the operational capacities of DCRs/SIFs varied in terms of funding, location, size and staffing, but their clients all shared common features of vulnerability and marginalisation. Estimated HCV prevalence rates were around 60%. Among a range of health and social services and referrals to other programs, most DCRs/SIFs provided HCV testing onsite (65%) and/or offered liver monitoring or disease management (54%). HCV treatment onsite was offered or was planned to be offered by 21% of DCRs/SIFs. HCV testing onsite was associated with provision of other services addressing blood-borne diseases and HCV treatment was linked to the provision of OST. HCV disease management was associated with employing a nurse at a DCR/SIF and HCV treatment was associated with employing a medical doctor.

CONCLUSIONS

DCRs/SIFs offer easy-to-access HCV-related services for PWID. The availability of onsite medical professionals and provision of support and education to non-medical staff are key to enhanced provision of HCV-related services in DCRs/SIFs. Funding and support for HCV treatment at the community level, via low-threshold services such as DCRs/SIFs, are worthy of action.

'Enjoying the kick': Locating pleasure within the drug consumption room

BACKGROUND

Harm reduction policy and praxis has long struggled to accommodate the pleasures of alcohol and other drug use. Whilst scholars have consistently highlighted this struggle, how pleasure might come to practically inform the design and delivery of harm reduction policies and programs remains less clear. The present paper seeks to move beyond conceptual critiques of harm reduction's 'pleasure oversight' to more focused empirical analysis of how flows of pleasure emerge, circulate and, importantly, may be reoriented in the course of harm reduction practice.

METHODS

We ground our analysis in the context of detailed ethnographic research in a drug consumption room in Frankfurt, Germany. Drawing on recent strands of post-humanist thought, the paper deploys the concept of the 'consumption event' to uncover the manner in which these facilities mediate the practice and embodied experience of drug use and incite or limit bodily potentials for intoxication and pleasure.

RESULTS

Through the analysis, we mapped a diversity of pleasures as they emerged and circulated through events of consumption at the consumption room. Beyond the pleasurable intensities of intoxication's kick, these pleasures were expressed in a range of novel capacities, practices and drug using bodies. In each instance, pleasure could not be reduced to a simple, linear product of drug use. Rather, it arose for our participants through distinctive social and affective transformations enabled through events of consumption at the consumption room and the generative force of actors and associations of which these events were composed.

CONCLUSION

Our research suggests that the drug consumption room serves as a conduit through which its clients can potentially enact more pleasurable, productive and positive relations to both themselves and their drug use. Acknowledging the centrality of pleasure to client engagement with these facilities, the paper concludes by drawing out the implications of these findings for the design and delivery of consumption room services.

A historical review of HIV prevention and care initiatives in British Columbia, Canada: 1996-2015

INTRODUCTION

British Columbia has made significant progress in the treatment and prevention of HIV since 1996, when Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART) became available. However, we currently lack a historical summary of HIV prevention and care interventions implemented in the province since the introduction of HAART and how they have shaped the HIV epidemic. Guided by a socio-ecological framework, we present a historical review of biomedical and health services, community and structural interventions implemented in British Columbia from 1996-2015 to prevent HIV transmission or otherwise enhance the cascade of HIV care.

METHODS

We constructed a historical timeline of HIV interventions implemented in BC between 1996 and 2015 by reviewing publicly available reports, guidelines and other documents from provincial health agencies, community organizations and AIDS service organizations, and by conducting searches of peer-reviewed literature through PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE. We collected further programmatic information by administering a data collection form to representatives from BC's regional health authorities and an umbrella agency representing 45 AIDS Service organizations. Using linked population-level health administrative data, we identified key phases of the HIV epidemic in British Columbia, as characterized by distinct changes in HIV incidence, HAART uptake and the provincial HIV response.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In total, we identified 175 HIV prevention and care interventions implemented in BC from 1996 to 2015. We identify and describe four phases in BC's response to HIV/AIDS: the early HAART phase (1996-1999); the harm reduction and health service scale-up phase (2000-2005); the early Treatment as Prevention phase (2006-2009); and the STOP HIV/AIDS phase (2010-present). In doing so, we provide an overview of British Columbia's universal and centralized HIV treatment system and detail the role of community-based and provincial stakeholders in advancing innovative prevention and harm reduction approaches, as well as "seek, test, treat and retain" strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

The review provides valuable insight into British Columbia's HIV response, highlights emerging priorities, and may inform future efforts to evaluate the causal impact of interventions.

Mitigating the heroin crisis in Baltimore, MD, USA: a cost-benefit analysis of a hypothetical supervised injection facility

Background

In Baltimore, MD, as in many cities throughout the USA, overdose rates are on the rise due to both the increase of prescription opioid abuse and that of fentanyl and other synthetic opioids in the drug market. Supervised injection facilities (SIFs) are a widely implemented public health intervention throughout the world, with 97 existing in 11 countries worldwide. Research has documented the public health, social, and economic benefits of SIFs, yet none exist in the USA. The purpose of this study is to model the health and financial costs and benefits of a hypothetical SIF in Baltimore.

Methods

We estimate the benefits by utilizing local health data and data on the impact of existing SIFs in models for six outcomes: prevented human immunodeficiency virus transmission, Hepatitis C virus transmission, skin and soft-tissue infection, overdose mortality, and overdose-related medical care and increased medication-assisted treatment for opioid dependence.

Results

We predict that for an annual cost of $1.8 million, a single SIF would generate $7.8 million in savings, preventing 3.7 HIV infections, 21 Hepatitis C infections, 374 days in the hospital for skin and soft-tissue infection, 5.9 overdose deaths, 108 overdose-related ambulance calls, 78 emergency room visits, and 27 hospitalizations, while bringing 121 additional people into treatment.

Conclusions

We conclude that a SIF would be both extremely cost-effective and a significant public health and economic benefit to Baltimore City.

A Cost-Benefit Analysis of a Potential Supervised Injection Facility in San Francisco, California, USA

Supervised injection facilities (SIFs) have been shown to reduce infection, prevent overdose deaths, and increase treatment uptake. The United States is in the midst of an opioid epidemic, yet no sanctioned SIF currently operates in the United States. We estimate the economic costs and benefits of establishing a potential SIF in San Francisco using mathematical models that combine local public health data with previous research on the effects of existing SIFs. We consider potential savings from five outcomes: averted HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections, reduced skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI), averted overdose deaths, and increased medication-assisted treatment (MAT) uptake. We find that each dollar spent on a SIF would generate US$2.33 in savings, for total annual net savings of US$3.5 million for a single 13-booth SIF. Our analysis suggests that a SIF in San Francisco would not only be a cost-effective intervention but also a significant boost to the public health system.

Drug use in business bathrooms: An exploratory study of manager encounters in New York City

BACKGROUND

Though public bathroom drug injection has been documented from the perspective of people who inject drugs, no research has explored the experiences of the business managers who oversee their business bathrooms and respond to drug use. These managers, by default, are first-responders in the event of a drug overdose and thus of intrinsic interest during the current epidemic of opioid-related overdoses in the United States. This exploratory study assists in elucidating the experiences that New York City business managers have with people who inject drugs, their paraphernalia, and their overdoses.

METHODS

A survey instrument was designed to collect data on manager encounters with drug use occurring in their business bathrooms. Recruitment was guided by convenience and purposive approaches.

RESULTS

More than half of managers interviewed (58%, n=50/86) encountered drug use in their business bathrooms, more than a third (34%) of these managers also found syringes, and the vast majority (90%) of managers had received no overdose recognition or naloxone training. Seven managers encountered unresponsive individuals who required emergency assistance.

CONCLUSION

The results from this study underscore the need for additional research on the experiences that community stakeholders have with public injection as well as educational outreach efforts among business managers. This research also suggests that there is need for a national dialogue about potential interventions, including expanded overdose recognition and naloxone training and supervised injection facilities (SIF)/drug consumption rooms (DCR), that could reduce public injection and its associated health risks.

Exploring the role of an unsanctioned, supervised peer driven injection facility in reducing HIV and hepatitis C infections in people that require assistance during injection

Background

Supervised consumption rooms or supervised injection facilities (SIFs) are venues that have reduced the risk of needle sharing and deaths caused by drug overdose among people who inject drugs (PWID). As a result of such a decline in the mortality rate, numerous studies have been able to illustrate its cost-effectiveness. However, studies have neglected to examine the same phenomena for unsanctioned SIFs that are run by peer drug users and provide assisted injections.

Methods

The current study will determine whether the former unsanctioned SIF, that provided assisted injection and was operated by the grass root organization called Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU), cost less than the health care consequences of not having such a program in Vancouver, Canada. By analyzing data gathered in 2013, this paper relies on two mathematical models to estimate the number of new HIV and HCV infections prevented by the former unsanctioned facility in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside.

Results

A conservative estimate indicates that the SIF location that provided assisted injections has a benefit-cost ratio of 33.1:1 due to its low operational cost. At the baseline sharing rate, the facility, on an average, reduced 81 HCV and 30 HIV cases among PWID each year. Such reductions in blood borne infections among PWID resulted in annual savings worth CAN$4.3 million dollars in health care expenditure. In addition to this, the current paper relies on a sensitivity analysis based on different needle sharing rate scenarios.

Conclusions

The sensitivity analysis and the baseline rates indicate that funding SIF facilities operated by peer drug users that facilitate assisted injection appear to be an efficient and effective use of financial resources in the public health domain since they lead to a significant decline in the rate of mortality within a vulnerable population.

Correlates of public support toward federal funding for harm reduction strategies

Background

Historically, US federal policy has not supported harm reduction interventions, such as safe injection facilities (SIFs) and needle and syringe programs (NSPs), which can reduce the burden associated with injection drug use. Given recent increases in abuse of both legal and illegal opioids, there has been a renewed debate about effective ways to address this problem. The current study (1) assessed participants’ support for SIFs and NSPs, and (2) evaluated several demographic factors (e.g., age, gender, race, education, political ideology, and religiosity) and individual differences in stigmatizing beliefs about people who inject drugs (PWID) that might relate to support for these interventions.

Methods

U.S. adults (N = 899) completed a web-based study that assessed self-reported support for NSPs and SIFs, and stigma about PWID.

Results

The majority of participants were at least somewhat supportive of both NSPs and SIFs. Regression analyses indicated greater support for NSPs and SIFs was predicted by more liberal political ideology, more agreement that PWID deserve help rather than punishment, older age, and male gender. Also, participants who endorsed lower stigma about PWID were more supportive of NSPs and SIFs. Race, religiosity, and education did not predict support for NSPs and SIFs.

Conclusions

Most participants tended to report support for harm reduction strategies. Age, political ideology, and individual differences in stigmatizing beliefs about PWID were significantly associated with support. Given the potential malleability of stigmatizing beliefs, efforts that seek to shift stigma about PWID could have important implications for public policy towards harm reduction strategies for PWID.

Supervised injection services: what has been demonstrated? A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Supervised injection services (SISs) have been developed to promote safer drug injection practices, enhance health-related behaviors among people who inject drugs (PWID), and connect PWID with external health and social services. Nevertheless, SISs have also been accused of fostering drug use and drug trafficking.

AIMS

To systematically collect and synthesize the currently available evidence regarding SIS-induced benefits and harm.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed via the PubMed, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect databases using the keyword algorithm [("supervised" or "safer") and ("injection" or "injecting" or "shooting" or "consumption") and ("facility" or "facilities" or "room" or "gallery" or "centre" or "site")].

RESULTS

Seventy-five relevant articles were found. All studies converged to find that SISs were efficacious in attracting the most marginalized PWID, promoting safer injection conditions, enhancing access to primary health care, and reducing the overdose frequency. SISs were not found to increase drug injecting, drug trafficking or crime in the surrounding environments. SISs were found to be associated with reduced levels of public drug injections and dropped syringes. Of the articles, 85% originated from Vancouver or Sydney.

CONCLUSION

SISs have largely fulfilled their initial objectives without enhancing drug use or drug trafficking. Almost all of the studies found in this review were performed in Canada or Australia, whereas the majority of SISs are located in Europe. The implementation of new SISs in places with high rates of injection drug use and associated harms appears to be supported by evidence.

Interventions to prevent HIV and Hepatitis C in people who inject drugs: a review of reviews to assess evidence of effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Injecting drug use is a major risk factor for the acquisition and transmission of HIV and Hepatitis C virus (HCV). Prevention of these infections among people who inject drugs (PWID) is critical to reduce ongoing transmission, morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

A review of reviews was undertaken involving systematic literature searches of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychINFO, IBSS and the Cochrane Library (2000-2011) to identify English language reviews regarding the effectiveness of harm reduction interventions in relation to HIV transmission, HCV transmission and injecting risk behaviour (IRB). Interventions included needle and syringe programmes (NSP); the provision of injection paraphernalia; opiate substitution treatment (OST); information, education and counselling (IEC); and supervised injecting facilities (SIFs). Reviews were classified into 'core' or 'supplementary' using critical appraisal criteria, and the strength of review-level evidence was assessed.

RESULTS

Twelve core and thirteen supplementary reviews were included. From these reviews we identified: (i) for NSP: tentative review-level evidence to support effectiveness in reducing HIV transmission, insufficient review-level evidence relating to HCV transmission, but sufficient review-level evidence in relation to IRB; (ii) for OST: sufficient review-level evidence of effectiveness in relation to HIV transmission and IRB, but tentative review-level evidence in relation to HCV transmission; (iii) for IEC, the provision of injection paraphernalia and SIFs: tentative review-level evidence of effectiveness in reducing IRB; and either insufficient or no review-level evidence for these interventions in relation to HIV or HCV transmission.

CONCLUSION

Review-level evidence indicates that harm reduction interventions can reduce IRB, with evidence strongest for OST and NSP. However, there is comparatively little review-level evidence regarding the effectiveness of these interventions in preventing HCV transmission among PWID. Further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness and impact of scaling up comprehensive packages of harm reduction interventions to minimise HIV and HCV transmission among PWID.

'On the same level': facilitators' experiences running a drug user-led safer injecting education campaign

Background

Unsafe injection practices play a major role in elevated rates of morbidity and mortality among people who inject drugs (IDU). There is growing interest in the direct involvement of IDU in interventions that seek to address unsafe injecting. This study describes a drug user-led safer injecting education campaign, and explores facilitators’ experiences delivering educational workshops.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 8 members of the Injection Support (IS) Team who developed and facilitated a series of safer injecting education workshops. Interviews explored facilitator’s perceptions of the workshops, experiences being a facilitator, and perspectives on the educational campaign. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a thematic analysis was conducted.

Results

IS Team facilitators described how the workshop’s structure and content enabled effective communication of information about safer injecting practices, while targeting the unsafe practices of workshop participants. Facilitators’ identity as IDU enhanced their ability to relate to workshop participants and communicate educational messages in language accessible to workshop participants. Facilitators reported gaining knowledge and skills from their involvement in the campaign, as well as positive feelings about themselves from the realization that they were helping people to protect their health. Overall, facilitators felt that this campaign provided IDU with valuable information, although facilitators also critiqued the campaign and suggested improvements for future efforts.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates the feasibility of involving IDU in educational initiatives targeting unsafe injecting. Findings illustrate how IDU involvement in prevention activities improves relevance and cultural appropriateness of interventions while providing individual, social, and professional benefits to those IDU delivering education.

Prospects for scaling-up supervised injection facilities in Canada: the role of evidence in legal and political decision-making

BACKGROUND

North America's first supervised injection facility-Insite-opened in Vancouver in 2003 under a special federal legal exemption. Insite has faced significant political and legal opposition, which culminated in a recent Supreme Court of Canada ruling that ordered the federal Minister of Health to extend the facility's exemption and cited evidence that the facility is life-preserving and does not increase public disorder. Officials in several other cities have initiated or accelerated preparations for new facilities due to speculation that the ruling provides sufficient legal basis to expand supervised injection in Canada. However, a comprehensive assessment of the barriers and facilitators to supervised injection facility scale-up is lacking.

METHODS

This policy case study reviews a corpus of jurisprudence, legislation, scientific research and media texts to: describe the role of evidence in legal and political decision-making around Insite; analyze the implications of the Insite decision for new facilities; and discuss alternative avenues for supervised injection facility expansion.

RESULTS

The Insite decision does not simplify the path towards new supervised injection facilities, but nor does it does pose an insurmountable hurdle. Whether new facilities will be established depends largely upon how the Minister of Health interprets the ruling, the proponents' ability to demonstrate need and support from municipal and provincial governments and community members. Formally defining supervised injection as within nurses' scope of practice could further efforts to establish new facilities.

CONCLUSION

Additional court action may be required to establish a stable legal and policy basis for supervised injection facilities in Canada.

Canada's highest court unchains injection drug users; implications for harm reduction as standard of healthcare

North America’s only supervised injection facility, Insite, opened its doors in September of 2003 with a federal exemption as a three-year scientific study. The results of the study, evaluated by an independent research team, showed it to be successful in engaging the target group in healthcare, preventing overdose death and HIV infections while increasing uptake and retention in detox and treatment. The research, published in peer-reviewed medical and scientific journals, also showed that the program did not increase public disorder, crime or drug use. Despite the substantial evidence showing the effectiveness of the program, the future of Insite came under threat with the election of a conservative federal government in 2006. As a result, the PHS Community Services Society (PHS), the non-profit organization that operates Insite, launched a legal case to protect the program. On 30 September 2011, Supreme Court of Canada ruled in favour of Insite and underscored the rights of people with addictions to the security of their person under section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter of Rights). The decision clears the ground for other jurisdictions in Canada, and perhaps North America, to implement supervised injection and harm reduction where it is epidemiologically indicated. The legal case validates the personhood of people with addictions while metaphorically unchaining them from the criminal justice system.

Improving community health and safety in Canada through evidence-based policies on illegal drugs

Illegal drug use remains a serious threat to community health in Canada, yet there has been a remarkable discordance between scientific evidence and policy in this area, with most resources going to drug use prevention and drug law enforcement activities that have proven ineffective. Conversely, evidence-based drug treatment programs have been chronically underfunded, despite their cost-effectiveness. Similarly, various harm reduction strategies, such as needle exchange, supervised injecting programs and opioid substitution therapy, have also proven effective at reducing drug-related harm but receive limited government support. Accordingly, Canadian society would greatly benefit from reorienting its drug policies on addiction, with consideration of addiction as a health issue, rather than primarily a criminal justice issue. In this context, and in light of the simple reality that drug prohibition has not effectively reduced the availability of most illegal drugs and has instead contributed to a vast criminal enterprise and related violence, among other harms, alternatives should be prioritized for evaluation.

Police perceptions of supervised consumption sites (SCSs): a qualitative study

Police are key stakeholders in cities considering supervised consumption site (SCS) implementation. We examine police perceptions of SCSs using data collected between 2008 and 2010. Data from interviews and focus groups conducted with police officers of varied ranks (n = 18) in Ottawa and Toronto, Canada, were analyzed using thematic analyses. Participants opposed SCS implementation in their respective cities. The police views we heard invoke values and perspectives on evidence that differ from those used in research. Whether these divergent frameworks are reconcilable is a question for future research. Study limitations are noted. The Ontario HIV Treatment Network funded the study.

Potential role of safer injection facilities in reducing HIV and hepatitis C infections and overdose mortality in the United States

BACKGROUND

Safer injection facilities (SIFs) reduce risks associated with injecting drugs, particularly public injection and overdose mortality. They exist in many countries, but do not exist in the United States. We assessed several ethical, operational, and public health considerations for establishing SIFs in the United States.

METHOD

We used the six-factor Kass framework (goals, effectiveness, concerns, minimization of concerns, fair implementation, and balancing of benefits and concerns), summarized needs of persons who inject drugs in the United States, and reviewed global evidence for SIFs.

RESULTS

SIFs offer a hygienic environment to inject drugs, provide sterile injection equipment at time of injection, and allow for safe disposal of used equipment. Injection of pre-obtained drugs, purchased by persons who inject drugs, happens in a facility where trained personnel provide on-site counseling and referral to addiction treatment and health care and intervene in overdose emergency situations. SIFs provide positive health benefits (reducing transmission of HIV and viral hepatitis, bacterial infections, and overdose mortality) without evidence for negative health or social consequences. SIFs serve most-at-risk persons, including those who inject in public or inject frequently, and those who do not use other public health programs. It is critical to address legal, ethical, and local concerns, develop and implement relevant policies and procedures, and assess individual- and community-level needs and benefits of SIFs given local epidemiologic data.

CONCLUSIONS

SIFs have the potential to reduce viral and bacterial infections and overdose mortality among those who engage in high-risk injection behaviors by offering unique public health services that are complementary to other interventions.

Use of North America's first medically supervised safer injecting facility among HIV-positive injection drug users

The objective of this study was to examine supervised injecting facility (SIF) use among a cohort of 395 HIV-positive injection drug users (IDUs) in Vancouver, Canada. The correlates of SIF use were identified using generalized estimating equation analyses. In multivariate analyses, frequent SIF use was associated with homelessness (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.90), daily heroin injection (AOR = 1.56), and daily cocaine injection (AOR = 1.59). The reasons given for not using the SIF included a preference for injecting at home and already having a safe place to inject. The SIF services most commonly used were needle exchange and nursing services. The SIF appears to have attracted a high-risk subpopulation of HIV-positive IDUs; this coverage perhaps could be extended with the addition of HIV-specific services such as disease monitoring and the provision of antiretroviral therapy.

An appeal to humanity: legal victory in favour of North America's only supervised injection facility: Insite

Canada's federal government has once again failed to shut North America's only authorized supervised injection facility: Insite. A majority ruling issued by the BC Court of Appeal on 15 January 2010 upheld an earlier British Columbia Supreme Court ruling in 2008 that protected the rights of injection drug users (IDUs) to access Insite as a health facility as per the Charter of Rights and Freedoms component of the Constitution of Canada. The majority decision from Honourable Madam Justices Rowles, Huddart and Smith also established a jurisdictional victory safeguarding Insite as most appropriately run under the authority of the province of British Columbia rather than the federal Government of Canada. The Federal Government has appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Canada. A hearing date has been set for 12 May 2011. The appeal will be a legal one but even more so, it will be an appeal to humanity.

Prevention of HIV infection for people who inject drugs: why individual, structural, and combination approaches are needed

HIV can spread rapidly between people who inject drugs (through injections and sexual transmission), and potentially the virus can pass to the wider community (by sexual transmission). Here, we summarise evidence on the effectiveness of individual-level approaches to prevention of HIV infection; review global and regional coverage of opioid substitution treatment, needle and syringe programmes, and antiretroviral treatment; model the effect of increased coverage and a combination of these three approaches on HIV transmission and prevalence in injecting drug users; and discuss evidence for structural-level interventions. Each intervention alone will achieve modest reductions in HIV transmission, and prevention of HIV transmission necessitates high-coverage and combined approaches. Social and structural changes are potentially beneficial components in a combined-intervention strategy, especially when scale-up is difficult or reductions in HIV transmission and injection risk are difficult to achieve. Although further evidence is needed on how to optimise combinations of interventions in different settings and epidemics, we know enough now about which actions are effective: the challenge is to deliver these well and to scale.

Epidemiology of HIV among injecting and non-injecting drug users: current trends and implications for interventions

Injecting drug use is a major driver of HIV infections in Eastern Europe, the Commonwealth of Independent States, North Africa, the Middle East, and many parts of Asia and North America. We provide a global overview of the epidemiology of HIV infection among drug users and present current drug use trends that may constitute important epidemic drivers. We describe trends in ethnic disparities among injecting drug using (IDU) populations in the United States, and comment upon how these trends may now be changing. We present examples where HIV infection among non-IDUs who use cocaine, crack, and methamphetamine by other routes of administration is similar to that among IDUs, and discuss potential mechanisms of HIV spread in this overlooked population. Finally, we comment upon the potential implications of these observations for HIV interventions among IDU and non-IDU populations, taking into account different strategies that are needed in settings where HIV and/or injecting drug use has been established, or threatens to emerge.

HIV among injecting drug users: current epidemiology, biologic markers, respondent-driven sampling, and supervised-injection facilities

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe recent research done primarily during the past 12 months (i.e., primarily in 2008) on the epidemiology of HIV infection among injecting drug users (IDUs).

RECENT FINDINGS

Major research developments include a global assessment of HIV infection among IDUs and evidence of a transition from epidemics concentrated among IDUs to generalized, heterosexual epidemics in eastern Europe and Asia. Intervention research also includes several studies of supervised-injecting facilities. Methodological research includes respondent-driven sampling and the use of hepatitis C virus and herpes simplex virus-2 as biomarkers for injecting and sexual risk.

SUMMARY

There have been important advances in research during the past year, but HIV infection continues to spread rapidly across many areas of the world among IDUs and their nondrug-using sex partners.

Fighting addiction's death row: British Columbia Supreme Court Justice Ian Pitfield shows a measure of legal courage

The art in law, like medicine, is in its humanity. Nowhere is the humanity in law more poignant than in BC Supreme Court Justice Ian Pitfield's recent judgment in the legal case aimed at protecting North America's only supervised injection facility (SIF) as a healthcare program: PHS Community Services Society versus the Attorney General of Canada. In order to protect the SIF from politicization, the PHS Community Services Society, the community organization that established and operates the program, along with two people living with addiction and three lawyers working for free, pro bono publico, took the federal government of Canada to court. The courtroom struggle that ensued was akin to a battle between David and Goliath. The judge in the case, Justice Pitfield, ruled in favour of the PHS and gave the Government of Canada one year to bring the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) into compliance with the country's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If parliament fails to do so, then the CDSA will evaporate from enforceability and law in June of 2009. Despite the fact that there are roughly twelve million intravenous drug addiction users in the world today, politics andprejudice oards harm reduction are still a barrier to the widespread application of the "best medicine" available for serious addicts. Nowhere is this clearer than in the opposition by conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his faithful servant, federal health minister Tony Clement, towards Vancouver's SIF ("Insite"). The continued angry politicization of addiction will only lead to the tragic loss of life, as addicts are condemned to death from infectious diseases (HIV & hepatitis) and preventable overdoses. In light of the established facts in science, medicine and now law, political opposition to life-saving population health programs (including SIFs) to address the effects of addiction is a kind of implicit capital punishment for the addicted. This commentary examines the socio-political context of the legal case and the major figures that contributed to it. It reviews Justice Pitfield's ruling, a judgment that has brought Canada one step closer to putting a stop to addiction's death row where intravenous drug users are needlessly, for political and ideological reasons alone, forced to face increased risks of death due to AIDS, hepatitis and overdose.