Navigating post-eviction drug use amidst a changing drug supply: A spatially-oriented qualitative study of overlapping housing and overdose crises in Vancouver, Canada

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

BACKGROUND

While marked gender-based differences in drug-related risk and harm between men women who use drugs have been characterized to some extent, the complex relationship between gendered socioeconomic conditions, overdose risk, and drug use patterns and behaviours remains underexplored.

METHODS

We conducted gender-stratified repeated measures latent class analyses (RMLCA) with data from two ongoing cohorts of people who use drugs in Vancouver, Canada to identify discrete subgroups based on socioeconomic exposures. Multivariable generalized estimating equations models weighted by the respective posterior membership probabilities were applied to estimate the associations between socioeconomic class membership and non-fatal overdose. Sub-analyses investigated whether these relationships were explained by drug use-related variables.

RESULTS

Between June 2014 and March 2020, 1723 participants provided 12120 observations. At study baseline, 1074 (62.3%) were men and 649 (37.7%) were women. In RMLCA, five distinct profiles of socioeconomic exposures emerged for men, and four emerged for women. Classes were presented in ascending order of socioeconomic disadvantage (i.e., ranging from Class 1 [least disadvantage] to Class 4/Class 5 [most disadvantage]) and were primarily distinguished by variations in income, material and housing in/security, participation in illegal/informal income generation, and criminal justice involvement. In analyses adjusting for demographic characteristics, for both men and women, progressive increases in exposure to multiple dimensions of disadvantage were positively and independently associated with non-fatal overdose when compared to the least socioeconomically disadvantaged subgroup. Subsequent analyses revealed that systematic differences in drug use patterns and behaviours across categories of socioeconomic disadvantage largely accounted for these relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

Addressing multiple forms of mutually reinforcing health inequities may offer additional opportunity to mitigate non-fatal overdose in men and women who use drugs.

How the War on Drugs Impacts Social Determinants of Health Beyond the Criminal Legal System

There is a growing recognition in the fields of public health and medicine that social determinants of health (SDOH) play a key role in driving health inequities and disparities among various groups, such that a focus upon individual-level medical interventions will have limited effects without the consideration of the macro-level factors that dictate how effectively individuals can manage their health. While the health impacts of mass incarceration have been explored, less attention has been paid to how the "war on drugs" in the United States exacerbates many of the factors that negatively impact health and wellbeing, disproportionately impacting low-income communities and people of colour who already experience structural challenges including discrimination, disinvestment, and racism. The U.S. war on drugs has subjected millions to criminalisation, incarceration, and lifelong criminal records, disrupting or altogether eliminating their access to adequate resources and supports to live healthy lives. This paper examines the ways that "drug war logic" has become embedded in key SDOH and systems, such as employment, education, housing, public benefits, family regulation (commonly referred to as the child welfare system), the drug treatment system, and the healthcare system. Rather than supporting the health and wellbeing of individuals, families, and communities, the U.S. drug war has exacerbated harm in these systems through practices such as drug testing, mandatory reporting, zero-tolerance policies, and coerced treatment. We argue that, because the drug war has become embedded in these systems, medical practitioners can play a significant role in promoting individual and community health by reducing the impact of criminalisation upon healthcare service provision and by becoming engaged in policy reform efforts.

KEY MESSAGES

• A drug war logic that prioritises and justifies drug prohibition, criminalisation, and punishment has fuelled the expansion of drug surveillance and control mechanisms in numerous facets of everyday life in the United States negatively impacting key social determinants of health, including housing, education, income, and employment.• The U.S. drug war's frontline enforcers are no longer police alone but now include physicians, nurses, teachers, neighbours, social workers, employers, landlords, and others.• Physicians and healthcare providers can play a significant role in promoting individual and community health by reducing the impact of criminalisation upon healthcare service provision and engaging in policy reform.Appeared originally in Ann Med 2022; 54:2024-2038.

Increases in housing rules and surveillance during COVID-19: impacts on overdose and overdose response in a community-based cohort of sex workers who use drugs in Vancouver, BC

INTRODUCTION

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 risk mitigation measures have expanded to include increased rules and surveillance in supportive housing. Yet, in the context of the dual public health emergencies of COVID-19 and the unregulated drug toxicity crisis, we have not evaluated the unintended health and social consequences of such measures, especially on criminalized women. In order to address this dearth of evidence, our aim was to assess the association between increased housing rules and surveillance during COVID-19 and (a) nonfatal overdose, and (b) administration of naloxone for overdose reversal among women sex workers who use drugs in Vancouver, BC.

METHODS

This study is nested within An Evaluation of Sex Workers Health Access (AESHA), a community-based prospective cohort of women sex workers in Metro Vancouver (2010-present). Using cross-sectional data collected during the first year of COVID-19 (April 2020-2021), we developed separate multivariable logistic regression confounder models to examine the independent associations between experiencing increased housing rules and surveillance during COVID-19 on (a) nonfatal overdose, and (b) administration of naloxone for overdose reversal in the last 6 months.

RESULTS

Amongst 166 participants, 10.8% reported experiencing a recent non-fatal overdose and 31.3% recently administered naloxone for overdose reversal. 56.6% reported experiencing increased rules and surveillance within their housing during COVID-19. The prevalence of non-fatal overdose and administering naloxone was significantly elevated among those exposed to increased housing rules and surveillance during COVID-19 versus those who were unexposed (83.3% vs. 52.1%; 75.0% vs. 48.2%, respectively). In separate multivariate confounder models, exposure to increased housing rules and surveillance during COVID-19 was independently associated with increased odds of administering naloxone [AOR: 3.66, CI: 1.63-8.21], and marginally associated with non-fatal overdose [AOR: 3.49, CI: 0.92-13.27].

CONCLUSION

Efforts to prioritize the right to safe, adequate and affordable housing must avoid reinforcing an overly coercive reliance on surveillance measures which, while often well-intended, can negatively shape residents' well-being. Furthermore, public health responses to pandemics must include criminalized populations so that measures do not exacerbate overdose risk. Implementation of a regulated drug supply is recommended, alongside housing policies that promote residents' rights, safety, and health.

Lost in transition: A protocol for a retrospective, longitudinal cohort study for addressing challenges in opioid treatment for transition-age adults

BACKGROUND

In the United States, there has been a concerning rise in the prevalence of opioid use disorders (OUD) among transition-age (TA) adults, 18 to 25-years old, with a disproportionate impact on individuals and families covered by Medicaid. Of equal concern, the treatment system continues to underperform for many young people, emphasizing the need to address the treatment challenges faced by this vulnerable population at a pivotal juncture in their life course. Pharmacotherapy is the most effective treatment for OUD, yet notably, observational studies reveal gaps in the receipt of and retention in medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), resulting in poor outcomes for many TA adults in treatment. Few current studies on OUD treatment quality explicitly consider the influence of individual, organizational, and contextual factors, especially for young people whose social roles and institutional ties remain in flux.

METHODS

We introduce a retrospective, longitudinal cohort design to study treatment quality practices and outcomes among approximately 65,000 TA adults entering treatment for OUD between 2012 and 2025 in New York. We propose to combine data from multiple sources, including Medicaid claims and encounter data and a state registry of substance use disorder (SUD) treatment episodes, to examine three aspects of OUD treatment quality: 1) MOUD use, including MOUD option (e.g., buprenorphine, methadone, or extended-release [XR] naltrexone); 2) adherence to pharmacotherapy and retention in treatment; and 3) adverse events (e.g., overdoses). Using rigorous analytical methods, we will provide insights into how variation in treatment practices and outcomes are structured more broadly by multilevel processes related to communities, treatment programs, and characteristics of the patient, as well as their complex interplay.

DISCUSSION

Our findings will inform clinical decision making by patients and providers as well as public health responses to the rising number of young adults seeking treatment for OUD amidst the opioid and polysubstance overdose crisis in the U.S.

Characterizing Use of Supervised Consumption Services among Street-involved Youth and Young Adults in the Context of an Overdose Crisis

In response to an increase in overdose deaths, there was a rapid scale-up of supervised consumption services (SCS), including federally sanctioned SCS and low-barrier SCS known as overdose prevention sites (OPS), in Vancouver, Canada, beginning in December 2016. However, little is known about the use of such services among adolescents and young adults (AYA) in this context. We therefore sought to characterize factors associated with the use of federally sanctioned SCS and OPS among street-involved AYA who inject drugs in Vancouver during an overdose crisis. From December 2016 to March 2020, data were collected from a prospective cohort of street-involved AYA aged 14 to 26 at baseline. Using multivariable generalized estimating equation analyses, we identified factors associated with recent use of federally sanctioned SCS and OPS, respectively. Among 298 AYA who inject drugs, 172 (57.8%) and 149 (50.0%) reported using federally sanctioned SCS and OPS during the study period, respectively. In multivariable analyses, public injecting, negative police interactions, and residing or spending time ≥ weekly in the Downtown Eastside neighborhood were all positively associated with the use of federally sanctioned SCS and OPS, respectively. Additionally, ≥ daily unregulated opioid use and residential eviction were positively associated with federally sanctioned SCS use, while requiring help injecting was inversely associated. Self-identified female or non-binary gender was also positively associated with OPS use (all p < 0.05). Both federally sanctioned SCS and OPS successfully engaged AYA at heightened risk of adverse health outcomes. However, the lack of accommodation of AYA who require manual assistance with injecting at federally sanctioned SCS may be inhibiting service engagement.

Patterns of Socioeconomic Marginalization among People Who Use Drugs: A Gender-Stratified Repeated Measures Latent Class Analysis

Socioeconomic factors are important correlates of drug use behaviors and health-related outcomes in people who use drugs (PWUD) residing in urban areas. However, less is known about the complex overlapping nature of socioeconomic conditions and their association with a range of individual, drug use, and health-related factors in men and women who use drugs. Data were obtained from two community-recruited prospective cohorts of PWUD. Using a gender-stratified approach, we conducted repeated measures latent class analyses (RMLCA) to identify discrete latent socioeconomic subgroups. Multivariable generalized estimating equations were then used to identify correlates of class membership. Between June 2014 and December 2018, RMLCA of 9844 observations from 1654 participants revealed five distinct patterns of socioeconomic status for both men and women. These patterns were primarily distinguished by variations in income, material and housing security, income generation activity, exposure to violence, criminal justice involvement, and police contact. Across gender, progressive increases in exposure to multiple dimensions of socioeconomic disadvantage were found to be associated with frequent use of opioids and stimulants, accessing social services, and being hepatitis C virus antibody-positive. Similar but less congruent trends across gender were observed for age, binge drug use, engagement with opioid agonist therapy, and living with HIV. Gendered patterns of multiple and overlapping dimensions of socioeconomic adversity aligned with patterns of frequent drug use and health-related concerns, highlighting priority areas for gender-inclusive, multilevel responses to mitigate health disparities and meet the diverse socioeconomic needs of urban-dwelling men and women who use drugs.

Eviction as a community health exposure

Evidence suggests that being evicted harms health. Largely ignored in the existing literature is the possibility that evictions exert community-level health effects, affecting evicted individuals' social networks and shaping broader community conditions. In this narrative review, we summarize evidence and lay out a theoretical model for eviction as a community health exposure, mediated through four paths: 1) shifting ecologies of infectious disease and health behaviors, 2) disruption of neighborhood social cohesion, 3) strain on social networks, and 4) increasing salience of eviction risk. We describe methods for parsing eviction's individual and contextual effects and discuss implications for causal inference. We conclude by addressing eviction's potentially multilevel consequences for policy advocacy and cost-benefit analyses.

Socioeconomic marginalization and risk of overdose in a community-recruited cohort of people who use drugs: A longitudinal analysis

BACKGROUND

Poverty and socioeconomic disadvantage are important contributors to drug-related harm, but their precise role in overdose risk remains poorly understood. We sought to examine linkages between socioeconomic marginalization and non-fatal overdose risk in a community deeply affected by the ongoing drug poisoning crisis.

METHODS

This observational study used data derived from two community-recruited prospective cohorts of people who use drugs (PWUD) in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to assess longitudinal associations between multiple dimensions of socioeconomic disadvantage and self-reported non-fatal overdose.

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2020, 1,493 participants (38.2% women; 59.6% white; 35.7% Indigenous) provided 9,968 interviews. Non-fatal overdose was reported by 32.5% of participants over the study period. In multivariable analyses, non-fatal overdose was independently associated with incarceration (adjusted odds ratios [AOR]: 1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-1.88, p=0.012), homelessness (AOR: 1.57, 95%CI: 1.27-1.93, p<0.001), increased monthly income (AOR: 1.01, 95%CI: 1.00-1.01, p=0.029), and lower material security (AOR: 0.76, 95%CI: 0.67-0.88, p<0.001). We also observed differing strengths of association between illegal income generation and overdose in men (AOR: 1.84, 95%CI: 1.46-2.32, p<0.001) compared to women (AOR: 1.37, 95%CI: 1.06-1.78, p=0.016).

CONCLUSION

Non-fatal overdose was positively associated with incarceration, homelessness, higher monthly income, material insecurity, and engagement illegal income generating activities, underscoring the importance of addressing the socioeconomic production of overdose risk. These initiatives may include supportive housing interventions, alternative economic supports, and broader drug policy reform.

How the war on drugs impacts social determinants of health beyond the criminal legal system

There is a growing recognition in the fields of public health and medicine that social determinants of health (SDOH) play a key role in driving health inequities and disparities among various groups, such that a focus upon individual-level medical interventions will have limited effects without the consideration of the macro-level factors that dictate how effectively individuals can manage their health. While the health impacts of mass incarceration have been explored, less attention has been paid to how the "war on drugs" in the United States exacerbates many of the factors that negatively impact health and wellbeing, disproportionately impacting low-income communities and people of colour who already experience structural challenges including discrimination, disinvestment, and racism. The U.S. war on drugs has subjected millions to criminalisation, incarceration, and lifelong criminal records, disrupting or altogether eliminating their access to adequate resources and supports to live healthy lives. This paper examines the ways that "drug war logic" has become embedded in key SDOH and systems, such as employment, education, housing, public benefits, family regulation (commonly referred to as the child welfare system), the drug treatment system, and the healthcare system. Rather than supporting the health and wellbeing of individuals, families, and communities, the U.S. drug war has exacerbated harm in these systems through practices such as drug testing, mandatory reporting, zero-tolerance policies, and coerced treatment. We argue that, because the drug war has become embedded in these systems, medical practitioners can play a significant role in promoting individual and community health by reducing the impact of criminalisation upon healthcare service provision and by becoming engaged in policy reform efforts. KEY MESSAGESA drug war logic that prioritises and justifies drug prohibition, criminalisation, and punishment has fuelled the expansion of drug surveillance and control mechanisms in numerous facets of everyday life in the United States negatively impacting key social determinants of health, including housing, education, income, and employment.The U.S. drug war's frontline enforcers are no longer police alone but now include physicians, nurses, teachers, neighbours, social workers, employers, landlords, and others.Physicians and healthcare providers can play a significant role in promoting individual and community health by reducing the impact of criminalisation upon healthcare service provision and engaging in policy reform.