Acceptability of a safer injection facility among injection drug users in San Francisco

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

BACKGROUND

Overdose prevention centers (OPCs), also known as supervised injection facilities and safe consumption sites, are evidenced-based interventions for preventing overdose deaths and drug-related morbidities. The pathways to legalizing OPCs in the USA have confronted multiple social, political, and legal obstacles. We conducted a multi-site, qualitative study to explore heterogeneities in these pathways in four jurisdictions, as well as to understand stakeholder perspectives on valuable strategies for galvanizing political and public support for OPCs.

METHODS

From July 2022 to February 2023, we conducted 17 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with OPC policymakers, service providers, advocates, and researchers from California, New York City, Philadelphia, and Rhode Island, where efforts have been undertaken to authorize OPCs. Using inductive thematic analysis, we identified and compared contextually relevant, salient approaches for increasing support for OPCs.

RESULTS

Participants described several strategies clustering around five distinct domains: (1) embedding OPC advocacy into broader overdose prevention coalitions to shape policy dialogs; (2) building rapport with a plurality of powerbrokers (e.g., lawmakers, health departments, law enforcement) who could amplify the impact of OPC advocacy; (3) emphasizing specific benefits of OPCs to different audiences in different contexts; (4) leveraging relationships with frontline workers (e.g., emergency medicine and substance use treatment providers) to challenge OPC opposition, including 'NIMBY-ism,' and misinformation; and (5) prioritizing transparency in OPC decision-making to foster public trust.

CONCLUSION

While tailored to the specific socio-political context of each locality, multiple OPC advocacy strategies have been deployed to cultivate support for OPCs in the USA. Advocacy strategies that are multi-pronged, leverage partnerships with stakeholders at multiple levels, and tailor communications to different audiences and settings could yield the greatest impact in increasing support for, and diffusing opposition to, future OPC implementation.

High Interest in Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment With Hydromorphone Among Urban Syringe Service Program Participants

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment with hydromorphone (iOAT-H) is effective for persons who inject drugs (PWID) with opioid use disorder (OUD) but remains unavailable in the United States. Our objective was to determine interest in iOAT-H among syringe services program (SSP) participants.

METHODS

We recruited PWID with OUD from SSPs in New York City. Interest in iOAT-H was assessed on a 4-point scale. We compared participants who were and were not interested in iOAT-H regarding sociodemographic characteristics and self-reported variables (past 30 days): heroin use, public injection practices, and participation in illegal activity other than drug possession. Participants reported their preferred OUD treatment and reasons for these preferences.

RESULTS

Of 108 participants, most were male (69%), Hispanic (68%), and median age was 42 years. The median number of prior OUD treatment episodes was 6 (interquartile range: 2-12). Most (65%) were interested in iOAT-H. Interested participants (vs not interested) reported, over the prior 30 days, greater heroin use days (mean, 26.4 vs 22.3), injecting in public more times (median, 15 vs 6), and a higher percentage having participated in illegal activity (40% vs 16%). Preferences for OUD treatment were: iOAT-H (43%), methadone (39%), and buprenorphine (9%). Participants who preferred iOAT-H to conventional OUD treatments reported preferring injection as a route of administration and that available OUD treatments helped them insufficiently.

CONCLUSIONS

SSP participants with OUD reported high interest in iOAT-H. Participants had attempted conventional treatments but still used heroin almost daily. We identified PWID at risk for opioid-related harms who potentially could benefit from iOAT-H.

High willingness to use overdose prevention sites among suburban people who use drugs who do not inject

INTRODUCTION

Overdose prevention sites (OPS) are evidence-based interventions to improve public health, yet implementation has been limited in the USA due to a variety of legal impediments. Studies in various US settings have shown a high willingness to use OPS among urban and rural people who inject drugs, but data among people who use drugs (PWUD) via non-injection routes of administration in suburban areas are lacking.

METHODS

We utilized cross-sectional data from a sample of suburban PWUD who have not injected drugs in the past 3 months (N = 126) in Anne Arundel County, Maryland. We assessed PWUDs' likelihood of using a hypothetical OPS and perceived potential barriers to accessing OPS. We tested for associations between sociodemographic characteristics, drug use, service access, and overdose experiences with willingness to utilize OPS.

FINDINGS

Participants' median age was 42, and the majority were men (67%) and non-Hispanic Black (79%). Sixty-six percent reported willingness to use an OPS. Concerns about confidentiality (29%), arrest (20%), and transportation costs (22%) were the most anticipated barriers to using OPS. Men (75% vs 55%, p = 0.015), participants who used heroin (53% vs 32%, p = 0.017), and participants who used multiple overdose prevention behaviors (e.g., using fentanyl test strips) (36% vs 19%, p = 0.006) were more likely to report willingness to use OPS.

CONCLUSION

Most suburban non-injecting PWUD in the sample were willing to use an OPS. OPS implementation strategies in suburban settings should be tailored to reach PWUD via non-injection routes of administration while meeting the unique needs of suburban contexts.

[Drug Consumption Rooms : Opinion and willingness among people who inject drugs in Marseille, France]

BACKGROUND

In France, people who inject drugs (PWID) are still one of the most at risk population for contracting hepatitis C virus (HCV). Drug consumption rooms (DCR) have shown their effectiveness on HCV risk behaviors abroad and in France, where they have been recently evaluated with the COSINUS study. In France, two DCRs opened in 2016, one in Paris and another in Strasbourg. The objective of this sub-analysis was to explore the willingness to use a DCR in PWID living in Marseille, where no DCR is opened.

METHODS

The COSINUS study is a prospective multicenter cohort that included 665 PWID recruited in Bordeaux, Marseille, Paris and Strasbourg between 2016 and 2019. Investigators administered questionnaires face-to-face at regular intervals at baseline, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months. In Marseille, 199 PWID were recruited. A multivariable logistic regression model was performed to assess factors associated with willingness to use DCR among this population.

RESULTS

Among 545 observations corresponding to 195 distinct participants selected for analyses, 57% declared they were willing to attend a DCR. The main reason given was "to consume more cleanly". Receiving allowances (OR = 2.38; 95% confidence interval (CI) (95% CI) = 1.17-4.81), not having health insurance (OR = 3.61; 95% CI = 1.49-8.75), injecting daily (OR = 1.97; 95% CI = 1.05-3.70) and in a public space (OR = 2.66; 95% CI = 1.29-5.47) were all positively associated with willingness to use a DCR.

CONCLUSIONS

DCR are devices that target PWID exposed to high sanitary or social risks, i.e. people living in precarious conditions, who have to inject in public spaces, in deleterious sanitary environments and with rapid gestures in order not to be seen. These analyzes highlight that the people who most want to attend a DCR are aware of the harms associated with their practices and show a desire to seek protection from street-based drug scenes.

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

BACKGROUND

Supervised injection facilities (SIFs) provide spaces where persons who inject drugs (PWID) can inject under medical supervision and access harm reduction services. Though SIFs are not currently sanctioned in most of the US, such facilities are being considered for approval in several Upstate New York communities. No data exist from PWID in Upstate New York, and little from outside major US urban centers, on willingness to use SIFs and associated factors.

METHODS

This analysis included 285 PWID (mean age = 38.7; 57.7% male; 72.3% non-Hispanic white) recruited for a study on hepatitis C prevalence among PWID in Upstate New York, where participants were recruited from syringe exchange programs (n = 80) and able to refer other PWID from their injection networks (n = 223). Participants completed an electronic questionnaire that included a brief description of SIFs and assessed willingness to use SIFs. We compared sociodemographic characteristics, drug use/harm reduction history, healthcare experience, and stigma between participants who were willing vs. unwilling to use such programs.

RESULTS

Overall, 67.4% were willing to use SIFs, 18.3% unwilling, and 14.4% unsure. Among those reporting being willing or unwilling, we found higher willingness among those who were currently homeless (91.8% vs. 74.6%; p = 0.004), who had interacted with police in the past 12 months (85.7% vs. 74.5%; p = 0.04), and who were refused service within a healthcare setting (100% vs. 77.1%; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Our results support SIF acceptability in several Upstate New York PWID communities, particularly among those reporting feelings of marginalization. A large proportion reported being unsure about usage of SIFs, suggesting room for educating PWID on the potential benefits of this service. Our results support SIF acceptability in Upstate New York and may inform programming for underserved PWID, should SIFs become available.

Stakeholder preferences for supervised consumption site design, staff, and ancillary services: A scoping review of feasibility studies

BACKGROUND

Supervised consumption services (SCS) prevent drug related harms for people who use drugs (PWUD) and often require a feasibility study before implementation. While there is a growing feasibility study literature, it has not been synthesized for use by researchers and SCS planners. We conducted a scoping review of feasibility studies reporting on preferred SCS design characteristics, staffing models and ancillary services.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched academic databases and grey literature sources with key terms related to SCS and feasibility studies. Team members reviewed search results and included feasibility studies with findings relevant to SCS design, staff, or ancillary services. The research methods and findings from included studies regarding design elements were charted, collated, and reported.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1347 results; 26 met eligibility criteria for review. Most reported preferences for SCS location, hours and wait times. Few reported preferences for security, space allocation by type of drug use, and onsite opioid prescribing. PWUD generally preferred aligning design elements with the goal of harm reduction for clients while other stakeholders valued treatment as a goal. Specific considerations varied by implementation context.

CONCLUSIONS

These results can be used by SCS planners and researchers to help resolve implementation concerns and improve uptake among PWUD, which is critical during an overdose crisis. Future feasibility studies should ask about design preferences that may be significant to uptake but are not commonly covered in studies. These should also explore how context influences preferences to develop an evidence-based framework for context-specific design decisions.

Feasibility, acceptability, concerns, and challenges of implementing supervised injection services at a specialty HIV hospital in Toronto, Canada: perspectives of people living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Substance use significantly impacts health and healthcare of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV), especially their ability to remain in hospital following admission. Supervised injection services (SIS) reduce overdoses and drug-related harms, but are not often provided within hospitals/outpatient programs. Leading us to question, what are PLHIV's perceptions of hospital-based SIS?

METHODS

This mixed-methods study explored feasibility and acceptability of implementing SIS at Casey House, a Toronto-based specialty HIV hospital, from the perspective of its in/outpatient clients. We conducted a survey, examining clients' (n = 92) demand for, and acceptability of, hospital-based SIS. Following this, we hosted two focus groups (n = 14) and one-on-one interviews (n = 8) with clients which explored benefits/drawbacks of in-hospital SIS, wherein participants experienced guided tours of a demonstration SIS space and/or presentations of evidence about impacts of SIS. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Among survey participants, 76.1% (n = 70) identified as cis-male and over half (n = 49;54.4%) had been a hospital client for 2 years or less. Nearly half (48.8%) knew about clients injecting in/near Casey House, while 23.6% witnessed it. Survey participants were more supportive of SIS for inpatients (76.1%) than for outpatients (68.5%); most (74.7%) reported SIS implementation would not impact their level of service use at Casey House, while some predicted coming more often (16.1%) and others less often (9.2%). Most focus group/interview participants, believed SIS would enhance safety by reducing health harms (e.g. overdose), increasing transparency between clients and clinicians about substance use, and helping retain clients in care. Debate arose about who (e.g., in/outpatients vs. non-clients) should have access to hospital-based SIS and how implementation may shift organizational priorities/resources away from services not specific to drug use.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data showed widespread support of, and need for, hospital-based SIS among client stakeholders; however, attempts to reduce negative impacts on non-drug using clients need to be considered in the balance of implementation plans. Given the increased risks of morbidity and mortality for PLHIV who inject drugs as well as the problems in retaining them in care in a hospital setting, SIS is a key component of improving care for this marginalized group.

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.

Rules and Eligibility Criteria for Supervised Consumption Services Feasibility Studies - A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Supervised consumption services (SCS) reduce HIV risks and overdose for people who use drugs (PWUD) and are known to have wide-ranging public health benefits. Feasibility studies are often conducted as part of program/implementation development. We conducted a scoping review of SCS feasibility/pre-implementation studies to answer: what is known about stakeholders' opinions of SCS rules and eligibility criteria?

METHODS

Using the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we searched Medline, PsychINFO, Embase, CINAHL, and SCOPUS databases for: (a) empirical research, (b) reported in English, (c) focused on SCS, (d) pre-implementation feasibility studies (research conducted prior to implementation of SCS in a given context), (e) examining SCS operational rules and eligibility criteria. Abstracts were reviewed to verify appropriateness; full articles/reports were retrieved; data were extracted and charted.

RESULTS

Of the 1,268 data sources identified/reviewed, 19 sources, were included. Manuscripts showed the following criteria that might be considered when determining who can and cannot use SCS: age, pregnancy status, and opioid substitution treatment status. To govern behaviours at SCS, manuscripts focused on: acceptable modes of drug consumption, assisted injections, sharing drugs on-site, pill injecting, and mandatory hand washing, etc. Stakeholders generally agreed that; eligibility restrictions and site rules should be minimal to establish low-barrier services. SCS are often forced to contend with the tension between adhering to a medical or public health model and creating low-barrier services. SCS rules are at the center of this intersection because rules and eligibility criteria implemented to mirror other health services may not align with the needs of PWUD.

CONCLUSION

Given the public health significance of SCS, establishing best practices for service delivery is critical for increasing access and addressing implementation issues. Future research should examine other operational elements of SCS, such as design elements, staffing models, and ancillary services. Additional research should also focus on supervised smoking services.

High willingness to use overdose prevention sites among female sex workers in Baltimore, Maryland

BACKGROUND

Overdose Prevention Sites (OPS) operate worldwide as spaces where people can consume previously purchased drugs under supervision, and are linked to reductions in HIV/HCV transmission and fatal overdoses. As the United States weighs their merits and legality, research is needed to estimate acceptability and use among populations at high risk for overdose. We examine willingness to use OPS among street-based female sex workers (FSW) with prevalent drug use and associated morbidities.

METHODS

We describe self-reported willingness, barriers and conditions around use of a hypothetical OPS among 141 FSW engaged in active drug use in Baltimore City, and describe trends using Pearson's χ2 and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

Most women had history of overdose (55 %) and were likely to use OPS (77 %). Willingness was higher among women who: were sexual minorities (97 %;P=0.002),experienced homelessness (82 %;P=0.019), injected drugs (82 %;P=0.013), shared syringes (82 %;P=0.007), experienced sexual violence (92 %;P=0.045) or reported heroin use (83 %;P=0.039) in the past 3 months. Common anticipated barriers included transportation (45 %) and fear of arrest (41 %).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights a population of uniquely high-risk women who would benefit from an OPS integrated with other services. Conditions and barriers discussed are informative for planning and implementation.

Anticipated use of a supervised drug consumption site among syringe services program clients in King County, Washington: Assessing the role of opioid overdose and injection behavior

BACKGROUND

US jurisdictions are considering implementing supervised drug consumption sites (SCSs) to combat the overdose epidemic. No sanctioned SCS exists in the US, but King County, Washington has proposed Community Health Engagement Locations (CHELs), which would include supervised drug consumption. We assessed characteristics of people engaged in syringe services programs (SSPs) who anticipated SCS use.

METHODS

We estimated prevalence of anticipated SCS use in a 2017 cross-sectional sample of King County SSP participants (N = 377). We used Poisson regression with robust standard errors to estimate likelihood of anticipated SCS use by overdose history (experienced, witnessed only, neither), public injection frequency (always, some/most times, never), drug use behaviors, and sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

The sample was primarily male (66.8 %), white (69.5 %), and averaged 37 years old. Almost two-thirds of participants witnessed or experienced an overdose in the past year (43.2 % witnessed only; 19.6 % experienced overdose). Four in five SSP participants (83.0 %) anticipated any SCS use. Anticipated SCS use was higher among participants who experienced an overdose (risk ratio [RR] = 1.14, 95 % CI = 1.04, 1.24) than those with no overdose experience. In multivariable analyses, anticipated SCS use was higher among people reporting injecting publicly (e.g., always vs. never: aRR = 1.26, 95 % CI = 1.11, 1.43), and lower among people primarily using methamphetamine (aRR = 0.80, 95 % CI = 0.67, 0.96) compared to people primarily using opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

In King County, SCS services would be used by people at high risk of overdose, including SSP participants reporting injecting in public. SCSs could be an important step to promote health and safety across communities.

Examining Overdose and Homelessness as Predictors of Willingness to Use Supervised Injection Facilities by Services Provided Among Persons Who Inject Drugs

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Internationally, supervised injection facilities (SIFs) have demonstrated efficacy in reducing rates of overdose and promoting entry into treatment among persons who inject drugs (PWID); however, they remain unavailable in the United States. Early findings examining American PWID illustrate high overall willingness to use SIFs. The current study expands upon this research by examining PWID's likelihood to use SIFs based on services offered (eg, provides clean needles, linkage to treatment programs) and whether known risk factors (prior overdose, homelessness) influence PWID's willingness to use a SIF.

METHODS

Participants (n = 184) were patients entering short-term inpatient opioid withdrawal management in Massachusetts between May 2018 and February 2019 who reported injection drug use in the prior 30 days. We examined PWID's likelihood to use a SIF if eight unique services were available, and compared if this differed by overdose history and homelessness status using ordered logistic regression and Pearson's χ² -tests of independence.

RESULTS

Participants (34.2 [±8.3 SD] years of age, 68.5% male, 85.9% white, 8.2% Hispanic) reported being most likely to use SIFs that provided safety from police intervention (86.7%), entry into withdrawal management (85.9%), or clean needles (83.2%). Drug works disposal and safety from police were particularly important for PWID with a history of overdose.

CONCLUSION AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Overall, treatment-seeking PWIDs reported greater willingness to utilize SIFs if particular services were provided. These findings point to features of SIFs that may enhance treatment-seeking PWID's amenability to utilizing these services if such sites open in the United States. (Am J Addict 2021;30:21-25).

Acceptability of safe drug consumption spaces among people who inject drugs in rural West Virginia

Aim

Safe consumption spaces (SCS) are indoor environments in which people can use drugs with trained personnel on site to provide overdose reversal and risk reduction services. SCS have been shown to reduce fatal overdoses, decrease public syringe disposal, and reduce public drug consumption. Existing SCS research in the USA has explored acceptability for the hypothetical use of SCS, but primarily among urban populations of people who inject drugs (PWID). Given the disproportionate impact of the opioid crisis in rural communities, this research examines hypothetical SCS acceptability among a rural sample of PWID in West Virginia.

Methods

Data were drawn from a 2018 cross-sectional survey of PWID (n = 373) who reported injection drug use in the previous 6 months and residence in Cabell County, West Virginia. Participants were asked about their hypothetical use of a SCS with responses dichotomized into two groups, likely and unlikely SCS users. Chi-square and t tests were conducted to identify differences between likely and unlikely SCS users across demographic, substance use, and health measures.

Results

Survey participants were 59.5% male, 83.4% non-Hispanic White, and 79.1% reported likely hypothetical SCS use. Hypothetical SCS users were significantly (p < .05) more likely to have recently (past 6 months) injected cocaine (38.3% vs. 25.7%), speedball (41.0% vs. 24.3%), and to report preferring drugs containing fentanyl (32.5% vs. 20.3%). Additionally, likely SCS users were significantly more likely to have recently experienced an overdose (46.8% vs. 32.4%), witnessed an overdose (78.3% vs. 60.8%), and received naloxone (51.2% vs. 37.8%). Likely SCS users were less likely to have borrowed a syringe from a friend (34.6% vs. 48.7%).

Conclusions

Rural PWID engaging in high-risk behaviors perceive SCS as an acceptable harm reduction strategy. SCS may be a viable option to reduce overdose fatalities in rural communities.

Prospective client survey and participatory process ahead of opening a mobile drug consumption room in Lisbon

Background

Ahead of opening Portugal’s first mobile drug consumption room (MDCR) in Lisbon, information from People Who Use Drugs (PWUD) and local community members was necessary to determine current needs and shape the intervention. A participatory and peer-led process was ensured at all stages of data gathering and planning of the intervention.

Methods

Prospective clients were surveyed to determine their willingness to use the service and preferences for use and to gain sociodemographic information. Persons over the age of 18 who reported injection drug use (PWID) were recruited using convenience sampling in the main open drug use scenes in Lisbon. In-person interviews were conducted by trained peer workers between November and December of 2017. The results (n = 72) of the questionnaires were analyzed, providing descriptive statistics.

Results

There is a high level of willingness to use the MDCR, primarily for reasons of hygiene, privacy, and security. Most participants expressed a desire to use the MDCR daily. Potential clients are socially marginalized, and many suffer from unstable housing. Most are daily users and engage in unsafe injecting practices, such as public injecting and material sharing. High levels of hepatitis C, HIV, and hepatitis B were observed among the target population with low levels of healthcare access and utilization. Preferences were gauged regarding the scheduling of the MDCR’s hours and amount of time willing to travel to reach the MDCR and will be taken into account for implementation. The combination of high levels of willingness to utilize the service and high levels of need among the target population support the implementation of Lisbon’s first MDCR.

Conclusions

Continual participation of PWUD and other community members will be necessary to maximize the public health and social impacts of this intervention, relative to this baseline. The plan to continue the participatory and peer-led development of the MDCR includes integrating peer workers, clients, and local community members within the operation, management, and evaluation of the service. This research adds to a growing literature about drug consumption rooms (DCRs) in Europe, which is especially limited concerning MDCRs.

Willingness to Use Safe Consumption Spaces among Opioid Users at High Risk of Fentanyl Overdose in Baltimore, Providence, and Boston

Safe consumption spaces (SCS) are evidence-based interventions that reduce drug-related morbidity and mortality operating in many countries. However, SCS are yet to be widely implemented in the USA despite the escalating overdose epidemic. The aim of this multi-city study was to identify the factors associated with willingness to use a SCS among people who use drugs (PWUD) in Baltimore, Providence, and Boston, stratified by injection drug use status. Our secondary aim was to characterize the anticipated barriers to accessing SCS if they were to be implemented in these cities. PWUD were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey in 2017. The analysis was restricted to 326 opioid users (i.e., heroin, fentanyl, and non-medical opioid pill use). The majority (77%) of participants expressed willingness to use a SCS (Baltimore, 78%; Providence, 68%; Boston. 84%). Most respondents were male (59%), older than 35 years (76%), non-white (64%), relied on public/semi-public settings to inject (60%), had a history of overdose (64%), and recently suspected fentanyl contamination of their drugs (73%). A quarter (26%) preferred drugs containing fentanyl. Among injectors, female gender, racial minority status, suspicion of drugs containing fentanyl, and drug use in public/semi-public settings were associated with higher willingness to use a SCS; prior arrest was associated with lower willingness. Among non-injectors, racial minority status, preference for fentanyl, and drug use in public/semi-public settings were associated with higher willingness, whereas recent overdose held a negative association. The most commonly anticipated barriers to accessing a SCS in the future were concerns around arrest (38%), privacy (34%), confidentiality/trust/safety (25%), and cost/time/transportation (16%). These data provide evidence of high SCS acceptability among high-risk PWUD in the USA, including those who prefer street fentanyl. As SCS are implemented in the USA, targeted engagement efforts may be required to reach individuals exposed to the criminal justice system.

Overdose Prevention Site Acceptability among Residents and Businesses Surrounding a Proposed Site in Philadelphia, USA

Overdose prevention sites (OPS) are places where people use previously obtained drugs under the supervision of a health professional. They have been proposed in six United States (US) cities, including Philadelphia, to help reduce opioid-related overdose deaths and public injection. Philadelphia has the highest overdose rate among large cities in the US, which has led a local community-based organization to plan the implementation of OPS. Kensington, a neighborhood with the highest drug mortality overdose rates in the city, is a likely site for the proposed OPS. Given the dearth of research systematically assessing public opinion towards OPS prior to implementation, we enrolled 360 residents and 79 business owners/staff in the Kensington neighborhood in a cross-sectional acceptability study. Face-to-face surveys assessed participant characteristics, experiences with drug-related social problems, and OPS acceptability. Using descriptive statistics, we estimated factors associated with favorability towards opening an OPS in the Kensington neighborhood. Ninety percent of residents were in favor of an OPS opening in Kensington. Support was significantly higher among unstably housed individuals and persons who currently use opioids. In the business sample, 63% of owners/staff were in favor of opening an OPS in Kensington. A greater proportion of Asian/Pacific Islanders, Hispanic/Latinx respondents, and non-Hispanic/Latinx Black respondents were in favor of an OPS opening in Kensington compared with white respondents (p < 0.04). While details about implementation are still being considered, results indicate general acceptability among Kensington residents and businesses for an OPS, especially if it can deliver benefits that curb drug-related social problems. Should an OPS be implemented in Philadelphia, it would be important to monitor changes in drug-related social problems and acceptability post implementation.

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.

Establishing Sanctioned Safe Consumption Sites in the United States: Five Jurisdictions Moving the Policy Agenda Forward

OBJECTIVE

Safe consumption sites enable use of preobtained drugs in hygienic settings where trained staff are available to respond to overdoses and connect individuals with health and social services. This study examined efforts to advance policies to establish safe consumption sites in the United States, where no sanctioned sites exist.

METHODS

Between April and July 2018, the authors conducted 25 telephone interviews with a purposive sample of key informants in five communities considering safe consumption site implementation. Participants included organizers and advocates, government officials, and personnel with social service and health organizations. Interview notes were analyzed by using hybrid inductive-deductive coding.

RESULTS

Key strategies for organizing support for safe consumption sites included involving people who use drugs, engaging diverse partners, supporting allies in related causes, and using various tactics to garner support from policy makers. Major barriers to adoption included identifying the right locations, uncertainty about the federal response, mistrust arising from racial injustice in drug policy, and financing. Participants identified facilitators of progress toward safe consumption site adoption, such as building on existing harm reduction programs, securing political champions, and exposing community officials to programs operating internationally.

CONCLUSIONS

A window of opportunity may be opening to advance policy related to safe consumption sites; whether sanctioned sites become part of the broader policy strategy for addressing drug use and overdose in the United States will depend on the experiences of the first sites. Organizing around this issue may facilitate engagement among people who use drugs in broader conversations about drug policy.

Potential use of supervised injection services among people who inject drugs in a remote and mid-size Canadian setting

BACKGROUND

While supervised injection services (SIS) feasibility research has been conducted in large urban centres across North America, it is unknown whether these services are acceptable among people who inject drugs (PWID) in remote, mid-size cities. We assessed willingness to use SIS and expected frequency of SIS use among PWID in Thunder Bay, a community in Northwestern, Ontario, Canada, serving people from suburban, rural and remote areas of the region.

METHODS

Between June and October 2016, peer research associates administered surveys to PWID. Sociodemographic characteristics, drug use and behavioural patterns associated with willingness to use SIS and expected frequency of SIS use were estimated using bivariable and multivariable logistic regression models. Design preferences and amenities identified as important to provide alongside SIS were assessed descriptively.

RESULTS

Among 200 PWID (median age, IQR: 35, 28-43; 43% female), 137 (69%) reported willingness to use SIS. In multivariable analyses, public injecting was positively associated with willingness to use (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 4.15; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.08-8.29). Among those willing to use SIS, 87 (64%) said they would always/usually use SIS, while 48 (36%) said they would sometime/occasionally use SIS. In multivariable analyses, being female (AOR: 2.44; 95% CI: 1.06-5.65) and reporting injecting alone was positively associated with higher expected frequency of use (AOR: 2.59; 95% CI: 1.02-6.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that SIS could play a role in addressing the harms of injection drug use in remote and mid-sized settings particularly for those who inject in public, as well as women and those who inject alone, who report higher expected frequency of SIS use. Design preferences of local PWID, in addition to differences according to gender should be taken into consideration to maximize the uptake of SIS, alongside existing health and social service provisions available to PWID.

Impact of drug consumption rooms on risk practices and access to care in people who inject drugs in France: the COSINUS prospective cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

The high prevalence of hepatitis C and the persistence of HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) risk practices in people who inject drugs (PWID) in France underlines the need for innovative prevention interventions. The main objective of this article is to describe the design of the COSINUS cohort study and outline the issues it will explore to evaluate the impact of drug consumption rooms (DCR) on PWID outcomes. Secondary objectives are to assess how DCR (a) influence other drug-related practices, such as the transition from intravenous to less risky modes of use, (b) reduce drug use frequency/quantity, (c) increase access to treatment for addiction and comorbidities (infectious, psychiatric and other), (d) improve social conditions and (e) reduce levels of violence experienced and drug-related offences. COSINUS will also give us the opportunity to investigate the impact of other harm reduction tools in France and their combined effect with DCR on reducing HIV-HCV risk practices. Furthermore, we will be better able to identify PWID needs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Enrollment in this prospective multi-site cohort study started in June 2016. Overall, 680 PWID in four different cities (Bordeaux, Marseilles, Paris and Strasbourg) will be enrolled and followed up for 12 months through face-to-face structured interviews administered by trained staff to all eligible participants at baseline (M0), 3 month (M3), 6 month (M6) and 12 month (M12) follow-up visits. These interviews gather data on socio-demographic characteristics, past and current drug and alcohol consumption, drug-use related practices, access to care and social services, experience of violence (as victims), offences, other psychosocial issues and perception and needs about harm reduction interventions and services. Longitudinal data analysis will use a mixed logistic model to assess the impact of individual and structural factors, including DCR attendance and exposure to other harm reduction services, on the main outcome (HIV-HCV risk practices).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board of the French Institute of Medical Research and Health (opinion number: 14-166). The findings of this cohort study will help to assess the impact of DCR on HIV-HCV risk practices and other psycho-social outcomes and trajectories. Moreover, they will enable health authorities to shape health and harm reduction policies according to PWID needs. Finally, they will also help to improve current harm reduction and therapeutic interventions and to create novel ones.

Perspectives on supervised injection facilities among service industry employees in New York City: A qualitative exploration

BACKGROUND

Approximately 100 supervised injection facilities (SIFs) operate in 66 cities around the world to reduce overdose deaths, the spread of disease and public disorder, though none legally exist in the United States. Public bathrooms are among the most common public places for injection reported by people who inject drugs in New York City (NYC) and service industry employees (SIEs) inadvertently become first-responders when overdoses occur in business bathrooms. The goal of this study was to assess SIE acceptability of SIFs and the perceived effects that SIFs would have on them, their colleagues, their businesses and communities.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 SIEs recruited through convenience sampling throughout NYC. Participants were provided with peer-reviewed scientific evidence prior to discussing SIFs. Data were analysed using a hybrid deductive and inductive approach.

RESULTS

Most SIEs had encountered drug use (93%, n = 14/15) and syringes (73%, n = 11/15) in their business bathrooms and three had encountered unresponsive individuals. Nearly all workers (93%, n = 14/15) were supportive of SIFs and believed SIFs would reduce injection drug use in their business bathrooms. Participants also believed that 'not in my backyard' arguments from community boards may impede SIF operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Service industry employees are critical stakeholders due to their exposure to occupational health hazards related to public injection. Those interviewed were amenable to SIF operation as a form of occupational harm reduction and their experiences provide an important dimension to the political debate surrounding SIFs.

"Feeling confident and equipped": Evaluating the acceptability and efficacy of an overdose response and naloxone administration intervention to service industry employees in New York City

BACKGROUND

The problem of injection drug use in public bathrooms has been documented from the perspectives of people who inject drugs and service industry employees (SIEs). Previous studies suggest that SIEs are unaware of how to respond to opioid overdoses, yet there are no behavioral interventions designed for SIEs to address their specific needs. In response to this gap in the field, we constructed, implemented, and evaluated a three-module behavioral intervention for SIEs grounded in the Information-Motivation-Behavioral skills model. This paper focuses on the evaluation of one module, namely, the intervention component addressing overdose response and naloxone administration (ORNA).

METHODS

Participants were SIEs (N = 18 from two separate business establishments) recruited using convenience sampling. The study utilized a pre-/post-test concurrent nested mixed method design and collected quantitative and qualitative data including an evaluation of the intervention module. The primary outcomes were opioid overdose-related knowledge and attitudes. Acceptability was also assessed.

RESULTS

SIEs demonstrated significant improvements (p <  0.01, Cohen's d = 1.45) in opioid overdose-related knowledge as well as more positive opioid overdose-related attitudes (p< 0.01, Cohen's d = 2.45) following the intervention. Participants also reported high levels of acceptability of the module and suggestions for improvement (i.e., more role-playing).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the acceptability and evidence of efficacy of the ORNA module, as well as the utility of training SIEs in ORNA. The expansion of this training to other SIEs and public employees (librarians, etc.) who manage public bathrooms warrants further investigation.

Perceptions about supervised injection facilities among people who inject drugs in Philadelphia

BACKGROUND

People who inject drugs (PWID) are at high risk for infectious diseases, skin and soft tissue infections, and overdose. However, these harms are all avoidable when sterile injection equipment, hygienic places to inject, and medical care are accessible. Unfortunately, many PWID in the U.S lack these resources. The most vulnerable are forced to inject in public spaces, where individual risks are high and communal harms are sometimes many. Supervised Injection Facilities (SIFs) are an established intervention for reducing these harms. Despite positive experiences in other countries, little research explores how PWID in the U.S. perceive the value of such facilities.

METHODS

We conducted a freelisting exercise with PWID (n=42) and healthcare providers (n=20) at a syringe exchange program (SEP) that provides comprehensive clinical and social services in Philadelphia to inform in-depth semi-structured interviews with PWID (n=19) at the same location.

RESULTS

Participants expressed support for a potential SIF as a valuable public health intervention. They suggested that an SIF would improve PWID health while reducing the public disorder associated with injecting drugs in public. The latter was especially important to participants without stable housing, whose decision to inject furtively in secluded places was often motivated by desire not to upset community members, and particularly children. These participants acknowledged that such seclusion elevated the risk of fatal overdose. Despite similarly positive perceptions about an SIF, participants with stable housing reported that they would prefer to continue injecting at home.

CONCLUSION

Results both confirm and extend prior research about PWID and SIFs. Participants expressed support for SIFs as in prior survey research in the U.S. and in other countries. Facility location and housing status were identified as important determinants of facility use. Results extend prior research by illuminating PWID perceptions in the U.S. including motivations grounded in concern for public order.

The willingness of people who inject drugs in Boston to use a supervised injection facility

BACKGROUND

In Massachusetts, the number of opioid-related deaths has increased 350% since 2000. In the setting of increasing overdose deaths, one potential intervention is supervised injection facilities (SIFs). This study explores willingness of people who inject drugs in Boston to use a SIF and examines factors associated with willingness.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of 237 people who inject drugs and utilize Boston's needle exchange program (NEP). The drop-in NEP provides myriad harm reduction services and referrals to addiction treatment. The survey was mostly self-administered (92%).

RESULTS

Results showed positive willingness to use a SIF was independently associated with use of heroin as main substance (odds ratio [OR]: 5.47; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9-15.4; P = .0004), public injection (OR: 5.09; 95% CI: 1.8-14.3; P = .002), history of seeking substance use disorder (SUD) treatment (OR: 4.99; 95% CI: 1.2-21.1; P = .05), having heard of SIF (OR: 4.80; 95% CI: 1.6-14.8; P = .004), Hispanic ethnicity (OR: 4.22; 95% CI: 0.9-18.8; P = .04), frequent NEP use (OR: 4.18; 95% CI: 1.2-14.7; P = .02), current desire for SUD treatment (OR: 4.15; 95% CI: 1.2-14.7; P = .03), hepatitis C diagnosis (OR: 3.68; 95% CI: 1.2-10.1; P = .02), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnosis (OR: 3.27; 95% CI: 1.3-8.4; P = .01), report of at least 1 chronic medical diagnosis (hepatitis C, human immunodeficiency virus [HIV], hypertension, or diabetes) (OR: 3.27; 95% CI: 1.2-8.9; P = .02), and comorbid medical and mental health diagnoses (OR: 2.93; 95% CI: 1.2-7.4; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Most respondents (91.4%) reported willingness to use a SIF. Respondents with substance use behavior reflecting high risk for overdose were significantly more likely to be willing to use a SIF. Respondents with behaviors that contribute to public health burden of injection drug use were also significantly more likely to be willing to use a SIF. Results indicate that this intervention would be well utilized by individuals who could most benefit from the model. As part of a broader public health approach, SIFs should be considered to reduce opioid overdose mortality, decrease public health burden of the opioid crisis, and promote access to addiction treatment and medical care.

Acceptability and design preferences of supervised injection services among people who inject drugs in a mid-sized Canadian City

BACKGROUND

Supervised injection services (SIS) have been shown to reduce the public- and individual-level harms associated with injection drug use. While SIS feasibility research has been conducted in large urban centres, little is known about the acceptability of these services among people who inject drugs (PWID) in mid-sized cities. We assessed the prevalence and correlates of willingness to use SIS as well as design and operational preferences among PWID in London, Canada.

METHODS

Between March and April 2016, peer research associates administered a cross-sectional survey to PWID in London. Socio-demographic characteristics, drug-use patterns, and behaviours associated with willingness to use SIS were estimated using bivariable and multivariable logistic regression models. Chi-square tests were used to compare characteristics with expected frequency of SIS use among those willing to use SIS. Design and operational preferences are also described.

RESULTS

Of 197 PWID included in this analysis (median age, 39; interquartile range (IQR), 33-50; 38% female), 170 (86%) reported willingness to use SIS. In multivariable analyses, being female (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11-0.75) was negatively associated with willingness to use, while public injecting in the last 6 months (AOR 2.76; 95% CI 1.00-7.62) was positively associated with willingness to use. Participants living in unstable housing, those injecting in public, and those injecting opioids and crystal methamphetamine daily reported higher expected frequency of SIS use (p < 0.05). A majority preferred private cubicles for injecting spaces and daytime operational hours, while just under half preferred PWID involved in service operations.

CONCLUSIONS

High levels of willingness to use SIS were found among PWID in this setting, suggesting that these services may play a role in addressing the harms associated with injection drug use. To maximize the uptake of SIS, programme planners and policy makers should consider the effects of gender and views of PWID regarding SIS design and operational preferences.

Patterns of Twitter Behavior Among Networks of Cannabis Dispensaries in California

Background

Twitter represents a social media platform through which medical cannabis dispensaries can rapidly promote and advertise a multitude of retail products. Yet, to date, no studies have systematically evaluated Twitter behavior among dispensaries and how these behaviors influence the formation of social networks.

Objectives

This study sought to characterize common cyberbehaviors and shared follower networks among dispensaries operating in two large cannabis markets in California.

Methods

From a targeted sample of 119 dispensaries in the San Francisco Bay Area and Greater Los Angeles, we collected metadata from the dispensary accounts using the Twitter API. For each city, we characterized the network structure of dispensaries based upon shared followers, then empirically derived communities with the Louvain modularity algorithm. Principal components factor analysis was employed to reduce 12 Twitter measures into a more parsimonious set of cyberbehavioral dimensions. Finally, quadratic discriminant analysis was implemented to verify the ability of the extracted dimensions to classify dispensaries into their derived communities.

Results

The modularity algorithm yielded three communities in each city with distinct network structures. The principal components factor analysis reduced the 12 cyberbehaviors into five dimensions that encompassed account age, posting frequency, referencing, hyperlinks, and user engagement among the dispensary accounts. In the quadratic discriminant analysis, the dimensions correctly classified 75% (46/61) of the communities in the San Francisco Bay Area and 71% (41/58) in Greater Los Angeles.

Conclusions

The most centralized and strongly connected dispensaries in both cities had newer accounts, higher daily activity, more frequent user engagement, and increased usage of embedded media, keywords, and hyperlinks. Measures derived from both network structure and cyberbehavioral dimensions can serve as key contextual indicators for the online surveillance of cannabis dispensaries and consumer markets over time.

Willingness to use a supervised injection facility among young adults who use prescription opioids non-medically: a cross-sectional study

Background

Supervised injection facilities (SIFs) are legally sanctioned environments for people to inject drugs under medical supervision. SIFs currently operate in ten countries, but to date, no SIF has been opened in the USA. In light of increasing overdose mortality in the USA, this study evaluated willingness to use a SIF among youth who report non-medical prescription opioid (NMPO) use.

Methods

Between January 2015 and February 2016, youth with recent NMPO use were recruited to participate in the Rhode Island Young Adult Prescription Drug Study (RAPiDS). We explored factors associated with willingness to use a SIF among participants who had injected drugs or were at risk of initiating injection drug use (defined as having a sex partner who injects drugs or having a close friend who injects).

Results

Among 54 eligible participants, the median age was 26 (IQR = 24–28), 70.4% were male, and 74.1% were white. Among all participants, when asked if they would use a SIF, 63.0% answered “Yes”, 31.5% answered “No”, and 5.6% were unsure. Among the 31 participants reporting injection drug use in the last six months, 27 (87.1%) reported willingness to use a SIF; 15 of the 19 (78.9%) who injected less than daily reported willingness, while all 12 (100.0%) of the participants who injected daily reported willingness. Compared to participants who were unwilling or were unsure, participants willing to use a SIF were also more likely to have been homeless in the last six months, have accidentally overdosed, have used heroin, have used fentanyl non-medically, and typically use prescription opioids alone.

Conclusions

Among young adults who use prescription opioids non-medically and inject drugs or are at risk of initiating injection drug use, more than six in ten reported willingness to use a SIF. Established risk factors for overdose, including homelessness, history of overdose, daily injection drug use, heroin use, and fentanyl misuse, were associated with higher SIF acceptability, indicating that young people at the highest risk of overdose might ultimately be the same individuals to use the facility. Supervised injection facilities merit consideration to reduce overdose mortality in the USA.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12954-017-0139-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Willingness to access an in-hospital supervised injection facility among hospitalized people who use illicit drugs

BACKGROUND

Despite the reliance on abstinence-based drug policies within hospital settings, illicit drug use is common among hospitalized patients with severe drug addiction. Hospitalized patients who use illicit drugs (PWUDs) have been known to resort to high-risk behavior to conceal their drug use from healthcare providers. Novel interventions with the potential to reduce high-risk behavior among PWUDs in hospital settings have not been well studied.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to examine factors associated with willingness to access an in-hospital supervised injection facility (SIF).

DESIGN

Data were derived from participants enrolled in 2 Canadian prospective cohort studies involving PWUDs between June 2013 and November 2013. A cross-sectional study surveying various sociodemographic characteristics, drug use patterns, and experiences was conducted.

SETTING

Vancouver, Canada.

MEASUREMENTS

Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to explore factors significantly associated with willingness to access an in-hospital SIF.

RESULTS

Among 732 participants, 499 (68.2%) would be willing to access an in-hospital SIF. In multivariable analyses, factors positively and significantly associated with willingness to access an in-hospital SIF included: daily heroin injection (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.90; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-3.11); having used illicit drugs in hospital (AOR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.18-2.26); and having recently used an SIF (AOR = 1.53; 95% CI: 1.10-2.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the potential of in-hospital SIFs to complement existing harm reduction programs that serve PWUD. Moreover, an in-hospital SIF may minimize the harms associated with high-risk illicit drug use in the hospital.

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.

Interdisciplinary mixed methods research with structurally vulnerable populations: case studies of injection drug users in San Francisco

Research with injection drug users (IDUs) benefits from interdisciplinary theoretical and methodological innovation because drug use is illegal, socially sanctioned and often hidden. Despite the increasing visibility of interdisciplinary, mixed methods research projects with IDUs, qualitative components are often subordinated to quantitative approaches and page restrictions in top addiction journals limit detailed reports of complex data collection and analysis logistics, thus minimizing the fuller scientific potential of genuine mixed methods. We present the methodological logistics and conceptual approaches of four mixed-methods research projects that our interdisciplinary team conducted in San Francisco with IDUs over the past two decades. These projects include combinations of participant-observation ethnography, in-depth qualitative interviewing, epidemiological surveys, photo-documentation, and geographic mapping. We adapted Greene et al.'s framework for combining methods in a single research project through: data triangulation, methodological complementarity, methodological initiation, and methodological expansion. We argue that: (1) flexible and self-reflexive methodological procedures allowed us to seize strategic opportunities to document unexpected and sometimes contradictory findings as they emerged to generate new research questions, (2) iteratively mixing methods increased the scope, reliability, and generalizability of our data, and (3) interdisciplinary collaboration contributed to a scientific "value added" that allowed for more robust theoretical and practical findings about drug use and risk-taking.

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.

The validity of reporting willingness to use a supervised injecting facility on subsequent program use among people who use injection drugs

BACKGROUND

Innovative health programs for injection drug users (IDUs), such as supervised injecting facilities (SIFs), are often preceded by evaluations of IDUs' willingness to use the service. The validity of these surveys has not been fully evaluated. We sought to determine whether measures of willingness collected prior to the opening of a Canadian SIF accurately predicted subsequent use of the program.

METHODS

Data were derived from a prospective cohort of IDUs. The sample size for this study was 640 IDUs. Using multivariate logistic regression, it was assessed if a history of reporting willingness to use the program, were it available, was associated with subsequent use. In sub-analysis restricted to individuals who had a history of reported willingness, we used multivariate longitudinal analysis to identify factors associated with not attending the SIF.

RESULTS

Among 442 IDUs, 72% of those who reported initial willingness to use a SIF later attended the program, and a prior willingness to use a SIF significantly predicted later attendance (adjusted odds ratio = 1.67). In sub-analyses restricted to those who had a history of reporting willingness to use the SIF, not using the program was predicted by not frequenting the neighborhood where the SIF was located.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that reported willingness measures collected from IDUs regarding potential SIF program participation prior to its opening independently predicted later attendance even when variables that were likely determinants of willingness were adjusted for. These data suggest that willingness measures are reasonably valid tools for planning the delivery of health services among IDU populations.