Five years on: What are the community perceptions of drug-related public amenity following the establishment of the Sydney Medically Supervised Injecting Centre?

Changes in Australians' attitudes towards supervised injecting facilities

INTRODUCTION

Supervised injecting facilities (SIF) have been shown to reduce negative outcomes experienced by people who inject drugs. They are often subject to intense public and media scrutiny. This article aimed to explore population attitudes to SIFs and how these changed over time in Australia.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the National Drug Strategy Household Survey, a national sample collecting data on illicit drug use and attitudes towards drug policy among Australians (2001-2019). Ordinal logistic regression assessed sociodemographic characteristics associated with different attitudes to SIFs and binary logistic regression assessed trends over time and by jurisdiction.

RESULTS

In 2019, 54% of respondents (95% CI 52.9, 55.1) supported SIFs, 27.5% (95% CI 26.6, 28.4) opposed and 18.4% (95% CI 17.7, 19.2) were ambivalent. Support for SIFs correlated with having a university degree (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.58, 1.94), non-heterosexual identity (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.51, 2.17) and recent illicit drug use (OR = 1.74, 95% CI 1.55, 1.94). Male respondents or those living in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas had lower odds of supporting SIFs (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85, 1.00; OR 0.64-0.80, respectively). Between 2001 and 2019, support for SIFs increased modestly by 3.3%, those who 'don't know' by 7.4%, whereas opposition decreased by 11.7%. Between 2001 and 2019, support for SIFs increased in NSW and Queensland, whereas opposition decreased in all jurisdictions.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Opposition to SIFs declined over the past 20 years, but a substantial proportion of respondents are ambivalent or 'don't know enough to say'. Plain language information about SIFs and their potential benefits, targeted to those who are ambivalent/'don't know' may further increase public support.

In Support of Overdose Prevention Centers: Position Statement of AMERSA, Inc (Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance Use and Addiction)

Given increasing rates of fatal overdoses in the United States and the rapidly changing drug supply, overdose prevention centers (OPCs; also known as safe consumption sites) have been identified as a vital, evidence-based strategy that provide people who use drugs (PWUD) the opportunity to use drugs safely and receive immediate, life-saving overdose support from trained personnel. In addition to providing a safe, supervised space to use drugs, OPCs can house further essential harm reduction drop-in services such as sterile supplies, social services, and medical care. There are established national and international data demonstrating the lifesaving services provided by OPCs, inspiring a groundswell of advocacy efforts to expand these programs in the United States. Thus, the Association for Multidisciplinary Education and Research in Substance Use and Addiction (AMERSA) endorses OPCs, in addition to other harm reduction strategies that protect PWUD. Ultimately, it is imperative to increase access to OPCs across the United States and support key policy changes at the local, state, and federal levels that would facilitate urgent expansion.

"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.

Impact of a high-volume overdose prevention site on social and drug disorder in surrounding areas in San Francisco

BACKGROUND

Between January and December 2022 a multi-service center incorporating an overdose prevention site (OPS) operated with city government sanction in San Francisco. One concern often expressed about OPS is that they may increase social nuisance associated with drug use in the surrounding area, despite international evidence that this is not the case.

METHODS

We conducted systematic street observation of 10 indicators of drug- and homelessness-related social nuisance in a 500 m radius around the OPS and around a comparison point in the same city before and after the introduction of the OPS. We estimated the risk that any given street within sampling areas would have nuisance post-intervention relative to the control area using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Ratio of relative risks of any reported nuisance in the 500 m area surrounding the OPS from pre- to post-intervention to that of the comparison area was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.54, 0.87; p=0.002). The relative risk of drug-specific nuisance was similar to the comparison area pre/post intervention (0.90; 95% CI 0.66, 1.24; p=0.53). The risk of homelessness-specific nuisance decreased around the OPS (RR 0.7., 95% CI 0.52, 0.93; p=0.02) whereas they increased around the comparison area (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06, 1.68; p=0.02).

CONCLUSION

We found that implementing authorized OPS services in a U.S. city did not increase the prevalence of visible signs of drug use and homelessness in the surrounding area. These findings are similar to those found at OPS outside the U.S.

Community perceptions surrounding Lisbon's first mobile drug consumption room

Portugal's first Mobile Drug Consumption Room (MDCR) has been operating for over three years in two Lisbon neighborhoods. This qualitative study first creates a baseline understanding of community perceptions concerning the acceptability of and expectations surrounding drug consumption rooms in the communities of intervention. Then, at least six months after the initial interviews, it determines how these perceptions changed and what changes participants perceive in the neighborhoods. Findings highlight widespread acceptance of the MDCR among participants. One of the participants' priorities related to the MDCR was to lessen the visibility of public consumption, a change some participants perceived in the neighborhood. While in the first round of data collection participants primarily conceptualized the MDCR as a service for People Who Use Drugs (PWUD), in the follow-up round, they reported changes in the community.

Harm reduction in the hospital: An overdose prevention site (OPS) at a Canadian hospital

BACKGROUND

Substance use management in hospitals can be challenging. In response, a Canadian hospital opened an overdose prevention site (OPS) where community members and hospital inpatients can inject pre-obtained illicit drugs under supervision. This study aims to: (1) describe program utilization patterns; (2) characterize OPS visits; and (3) evaluate overdose events and related outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was completed at one hospital in Vancouver, Canada. All community members and hospital inpatients who visited the OPS between May 2018 and July 2019 were included. Client measures included: hospital inpatient status, use of intravenous access line for drug injection, and substances used. Program measures included: number of visits (daily/monthly), overdose (fatal/non-fatal) events and overdose-related outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 11,673 OPS visits were recorded. Monthly visits increased from 306 to 1198 between May 2018 and July 2019 respectively. On average, 26 visits occurred daily. Among all visits, 20% reported being a hospital inpatient, and 5% reported using a hospital intravenous access line for drug injection. Opioids (56%) and stimulants (24%) were the most common substances used. Overall 39 overdose events occurred - 82% required naloxone reversal, 28% required transfer to the hospital's emergency department and none were fatal. Overdose events were more common among hospital inpatients compared to community clients (6.6 vs 2.2 per 1000 visits respectively; p value = 0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

This unique OPS is an example of a hospital-based harm reduction initiative. Use of the site increased over time among both groups with no fatal overdose events occurring.

Acceptability of Overdose Prevention Sites in the Business Community in Baltimore, Maryland

Intervetions are urgently needed to reduce the trajectory of the US opioid overdose epidemic, yet implementation is often hampered by resistance or opposition from key community stakeholders. While businesses are economically and physically impacted by the opioid epidemic, they are rarely engaged in efforts to reduce its impact. The establishment of overdose prevention sites (OPS) is being discussed throughout many US jurisdictions with limited attention to the potential positive role of businesses in that process. We surveyed business owners and employees of businesses located in neighborhoods with concentrated drug markets. The study's primary aim was to examine their attitudes to locally-placed OPS. An iterative, two-phase sampling strategy was used to identify recruitment zones. In person (December 2019-March 2020) and telephone-based (April-July 2020) surveys were administered to distinct business owners and employees (N = 149). Sixty-five percent of participants supported OPS in their neighborhood and 47% had recently witnessed an overdose in or around their workplace. While 70% had heard of naloxone, and 38% reported having it on the premises. Correlates of supporting an OPS locally included living in the same neighborhood as work (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.99, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.30-3.05); having a more positive attitude towards people who use drugs (aOR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.13-1.58); and having recently seen an overdose in/around the workplace (aOR 2.86, 95% CI: 1.11-7.32). Lack of support being an owner (aOR 0.35, 95% CI: 0.15-0.83). These data indicate the extent to which businesses are directly impacted by the opioid epidemic and the power of personal experience in shaping OPS support in advocacy efforts.

Can a new formulation of opiate agonist treatment alter stigma?: Place, time and things in the experience of extended-release buprenorphine depot

INTRODUCTION

Stigma has corrosive effects on all aspects of care and can undermine individual and population health outcomes. Addiction-related stigma has implications for opiate agonist treatment (OAT) and the people who receive, provide and fund it. It is important to understand how stigma is made in OAT and the political purposes that it serves, in order to change the relations of stigma and avoid the reproduction of stigma in the delivery of new treatment formulations, such as extended release buprenorphine (BUP-XR).

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted at two time points with participants in a prospective single-arm, multicentre, open-label trial of monthly BUP-XR. Thirty-six participants (25 men, 11 women) were interviewed, and of these 32 participated in a second interview to explore their experience of transition from other treatment to BUP-XR.

RESULTS

Participants were highly aware of the of the social and material effects of stigma through the negative stereotypes attached to OAT and those who receive it. Participants narrated examples of how stigma governed as a biopower in the relations and practices of OAT provision at numerous levels: structural (such as in public discourse about OAT and the people who receive it, in media, in perceptions about the decisions of investment in medical technologies); organisational (policies about legitimate access to OAT); interpersonal (with health workers) and individual (self-identities). BUP-XR allowed greater freedom and normalcy for clients. The experience of BUP-XR drew attention to the stigmatising potential of time, place and things associated with other OAT requiring daily (or frequent) dosing, accentuating how stigma comes to be materialised as a relational effect of everyday practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving BUP-XR allowed participants to avoid some of the everyday biopolitical powers of other forms of OAT and to reshape self-identities. The altering of relations between time, place and things associated with other forms of OAT allowed participants to feel as though they "pass as normal" . However, the negative public discourse and stigma of OAT is a potential threat to BUP-XR to realise its potential for individual and population benefits.

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.

Health impacts of a scale-up of supervised injection services in a Canadian setting: an interrupted time series analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In response to a dramatic rise in overdose deaths due to injection drug use, there was a rapid scale-up of low-threshold supervised injection services (SIS), termed 'overdose prevention sites' (OPS), in Vancouver, Canada in December 2016. We measured the potential impact of this intervention on SIS use and related health outcomes among people who inject drugs (PWID).

DESIGN

Segmented regression analyses of interrupted time series data from two community-recruited prospective cohorts of PWID from January 2015 to November 2018 were used to measure the impact of the OPS scale-up on changes in SIS use, public injection, syringe sharing and addiction treatment participation, controlling for pre-existing secular trends.

SETTING

Vancouver, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Of 745 PWID, 292 (39.7%) were women, 441 (59.6%) self-reported white ancestry and the median age was 47 years (interquartile range = 38, 53) at baseline.

MEASUREMENTS

Immediate (i.e. step level) and gradual (i.e. slope) changes in the monthly proportion of participants who self-reported past 6-month SIS use, public injection, syringe sharing and participation in any form of addiction treatment.

FINDINGS

Post OPS expansion, the monthly prevalence of SIS use immediately increased by an estimated 6.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.7, 11.2] and subsequently further increased by an estimated 0.7% (95% CI = 0.3, 1.1) per month. The monthly prevalence of addiction treatment participation immediately increased by an estimated 4.5% (95% CI = 0.5, 8.5) following the OPS expansion, while public injection and syringe sharing were estimated to immediately decrease by 5.5% (95% CI = 0.9, 10.0) and 2.5% (95% CI = 0.5, 4.6), respectively. Findings were inconclusive as to whether or not an association was present between the intervention and subsequent gradual changes in public injection, syringe sharing and addiction treatment participation.

CONCLUSIONS

Scaling-up overdose prevention sites in Vancouver, Canada in December 2016 was associated with immediate and continued gradual increases in supervised injection service engagement and immediate increases in related health benefits.

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.

Supervised Injection Facilities as Harm Reduction: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Supervised injection facilities are harm reduction interventions that allow people who inject drugs to use previously obtained substances under the supervision of health professionals. Although currently considered illegal under U.S. federal law, several U.S. cities are considering implementing supervised injection facilities anyway as a response to the escalating overdose crisis. The objective of this review is to determine the effectiveness of supervised injection facilities, compared with that of control conditions, for harm reduction and community outcomes.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Studies were identified from 2 sources: a high-quality, broader review examining supervised injection facility-induced benefits and harms (from database inception to January 2014) and an updated search using the same search strategy (January 2014‒September 2019). Systematic review methods developed by the Guide to Community Preventive Services were used (screening and analysis, September 2019‒December 2020).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 22 studies were included in this review: 16 focused on 1 supervised injection facility in Vancouver, Canada. Quantitative synthesis was not conducted given inconsistent outcome measurement across the studies. Supervised injection facilities in the included studies (n=number of studies per outcome category) were mostly associated with significant reductions in opioid overdose morbidity and mortality (n=5), significant improvements in injection behaviors and harm reduction (n=7), significant improvements in access to addiction treatment programs (n=7), and no increase or reductions in crime and public nuisance (n=7).

CONCLUSIONS

For people who inject drugs, supervised injection facilities may reduce the risk of overdose morbidity and mortality and improve access to care while not increasing crime or public nuisance to the surrounding community.

Public support for harm reduction: A population survey of Canadian adults

We described public views toward harm reduction among Canadian adults and tested a social exposure model predicting support for these contentious services, drawing on theories in the morality policy, intergroup relations, addiction, and media communication literatures. A quota sample of 4645 adults (18+ years), randomly drawn from an online research panel and stratified to match age and sex distributions of adults within and across Canadian provinces, was recruited in June 2018. Participants completed survey items assessing support for harm reduction for people who use drugs (PWUD) and for seven harm reduction interventions. Additional items assessed exposure to media coverage on harm reduction, and scales assessing stigma toward PWUD (α = .72), personal familiarity with PWUD (α = .84), and disease model beliefs about addiction (α = .79). Most (64%) Canadians supported harm reduction (provincial estimates = 60% - 73%). Five of seven interventions received majority support, including: outreach (79%), naloxone (72%), drug checking (70%), needle distribution (60%) and supervised drug consumption (55%). Low-threshold opioid agonist treatment and safe inhalation interventions received less support (49% and 44%). Our social exposure model, adjusted for respondent sex, household income, political views, and education, exhibited good fit and accounted for 17% of variance in public support for harm reduction. Personal familiarity with PWUD and disease model beliefs about addiction were directly associated with support (βs = .07 and -0.10, respectively), and indirectly influenced public support via stigmatized attitudes toward PWUD (βs = 0.01 and -0.01, respectively). Strategies to increase support for harm reduction could problematize certain disease model beliefs (e.g., "There are only two possibilities for an alcoholic or drug addict-permanent abstinence or death") and creating opportunities to reduce social distance between PWUD, the public, and policy makers.

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.

Effects of messaging on public support for drug consumption rooms in scotland, UK

BACKGROUND

There is evidence to suggest that medically supervised drug consumption rooms (DCRs) may form part of responses to reduce drug-related harm. Although DCRs have been established globally, they are perceived by some to be a controversial approach in the UK, and Government has repeatedly rejected proposals to establish one in Glasgow, Scotland. As public support is an important component of policy development and enactment, we sought to investigate the effects of different types of message framing on public support for DCR.

METHODS

We undertook a cross-sectional online study with a randomised design, conducted with a nationally representative sample. Participants were randomised to one of six message conditions comprising combinations of four components. All conditions included i) a basic description of a DCR, and conditions included combinations of ii) factual information; iii) pre-emptive refutation of common public concerns about DCR; and/or iv) a sympathetic narrative describing a mother whose son died from a heroin overdose. After reading each message, participants completed a bespoke measure assessing support for DCR. Data were analysed using ANCOVA.

RESULTS

Complete data were obtained from 1591 participants (50.3% Female; mean age 44.9 ± 16.1 years). Compared to reading a basic description of DCR alone, there was greater support for DCR in participants receiving the refutation (p < .001); sympathetic + factual (p < .05); and sympathetic + factual + refutation (p < .001) message conditions. Presenting factual or sympathetic messages alone were not associated with increased support.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that public support for DCRs is not improved through communication of factual statements outlining potential benefits of the intervention alone. Advocates seeking to foster public support, and thus influence policy making, should also consider communication campaigns that address common concerns that the public might have about DCRs, and present the intervention in relation to potential benefits that they hold for people indirectly affected by drug-related harm.

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.

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.

Implementation contexts and the impact of policing on access to supervised consumption services in Toronto, Canada: a qualitative comparative analysis

BACKGROUND

Supervised consumption services (SCS) are being implemented across Canada in response to a variety of drug-related harms. We explored the implementation context of newly established SCS in Toronto and the role of policing in shaping program access by people who inject drugs (PWID).

METHODS

We conducted one-to-one qualitative semi-structured interviews with 24 PWID. Participants were purposively recruited. Ethnographic observations were conducted at each of the study sites as well as in their respective neighbourhoods. Relevant policy documents were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Policing was overwhelmingly discussed by participants from both SCS sites. However, participant responses varied depending on the site in question. Subthemes from participant responses on policing at site #1 described neighbourhood police presence and fears of police harassment and drug arrests before, during, or after accessing SCS. Conversely, subthemes from participant responses on policing at site #2 described immunity and protection from police while using the SCS, as well as a lack of police presence or fears of police harassment and arrests. These differences in implementation contexts were largely shaped by differences in local neighbourhoods and drug scenes. Police policies highlighted federal laws protecting PWID within SCS, but also the exercise of discretion when applying the rule of law outside of these settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants' perspectives on, and experiences with, policing as they relate to accessing SCS were shaped by the implementation contexts of each SCS site and how neighbourhoods, drug scenes, and differences in policing practices affected service use. Our findings also demonstrate the disconnect between the goals of policing and those of SCS. Until larger structural barriers are addressed (e.g. criminalization), future SCS programming should consider the impact of policing on the SCS implementation context to improve client experience with, and access to, SCS.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Opinion of health professionals and drug users before the forthcoming opening of the first drug consumption room in Paris: a quantitative cross-sectional study

Background

On the brink of the opening of the first French drug consumption room in Paris, the general opinion of the local involved health care professionals and drug users was not known. The objective of this study was to determine their expectations and to search for influencing factors.

Method

We carried out a quantitative cross-sectional study. A multiple choice questionnaire was proposed to the surrounding willing general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists, to the emergency doctors of Lariboisière hospital, and to the professionals of the harm reduction facilities and their drug users (PWUD). For each question, there was a choice between seven answers, from “− 3” (very negative impact) to “+ 3” (very positive impact). The influence of the characteristics of each group on its mean answers was explored by Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, and Spearman’s tests.

Results

The median expectations among the groups of responding GPs (N = 62), other health care professionals (N = 82), and PWUD (N = 57) were mainly positive. They thought that the drug consumption room (DCR) would improve the health of PWUD, reduce their at-risk behaviors, would not increase drug use or drug dealing in the neighborhood, and would reduce nuisance in the public space. Only the group of GPs expressed that the DCR could decrease the quietness of the neighborhood, and only the group of PWUD had higher expectations that the DCR would decrease the number of arrests and the number of violent behavior. GPs’ expectations were significantly better in terms of health improvement of PWUD and reducing their precariousness if they had a previous experience in addiction medicine (Mann-Whitney, p = 0.004 and p = 0.019), with a longer practice (Spearman’s rho, p = 0.021 and p = 0.009), and if they were currently prescribing opioid substitution treatments (Mann-Whitney, p = 0.030 and p = 0.002).

Among non-GPs, those who were working in addiction medicine centers had significantly better expectations than pharmacists, and the professionals of the local emergency department had intermediate expectations.

Conclusions

Health care professionals and drug users had a positive opinion of the to-be-created Parisian drug consumption room. Experience in addiction medicine influenced positively health professionals’ expectations.

Drug consumption rooms: Comparing times, spaces and actors in issues of social acceptability in French public debate

BACKGROUND

In October 2016, the first French drug consumption room (DCR) opened in Paris. We propose to examine the process through which this issue has been framed as a matter of public concern, after being ignored for almost 20 years. Our analysis of the controversy on DCRs investigates how public conversations on harm reduction evolve according to the time period (from the 1990s to the present), scale of discourse (local vs. national), and involved actors (politicians, professionals, local residents, and drug users).

METHODOLOGY

Our methodology includes analyses of media content: we reviewed 1735 articles published between 1990 and 2017. Our theoretical approach is in line with the sociology "des épreuves" derived from pragmatic sociology and controversy analysis. This approach goes beyond interactionism by attempting to place situations back into broader sociological realities. We also pay special attention to governance, a political lens that focuses on local aspects of negotiations and on the implication of a variety of actors.

RESULTS

While the current debate on DCRs in France draws on constraints and resources already present in the harm reduction debate of the 1980s, it also repositions itself by avoiding moral argumentation and featuring less confrontation in the professional sphere. Today, we can see that the center of this tense debate has shifted from the professional sphere to the political and residential spheres. Most often, residents advance concerns that are not directly related to drug users themselves, but that derive from their apprehension of living in a displaced and stranded neighborhood. The public conversation leaves little room for drug users, even though they are the primary stakeholders of harm reduction and play a crucial role in DCR advocacy.

CONCLUSION

Our work reveals that the controversy about DCR is the product of complex interactions between different kinds of actors harm reduction professionals, political actors at the local and national levels, local residents, and drug users. Comparing different instances of public debate reveals the specific limitations and potentials for change in French drug policy.

[Harm reduction interventions in drug users: current situation and recommendations]

Harm reduction encompasses interventions, programmes and policies that seek to reduce the negative consequences of the consumption of both legal and illegal drugs on the individual and public health. Harm reduction looks to mitigate the harm suffered by drug users through drug use monitoring and prevention, and promotes initiatives that respect and protect the human rights of this population. The harm reduction policies that have proven effective and efficient are: opioid substitution maintenance therapy (methadone); needle and syringe exchange programmes; supervised drug consumption rooms; and overdose prevention through peer-based naloxone distribution. In order to be effective, these policies must have comprehensive coverage and be implemented in areas where the target population is prevalent. Resident-based opposition to the implementation of these policies is known as the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) phenomenon, which is characterised by being against the implementation of new measures in a particular place, but does not question their usefulness. Given that any NIMBY phenomenon is a complex social, cultural and political phenomenon, it is important to conduct a thorough analysis of the situation prior to implementing any of these measures. Harm reduction policies must be extended to other substances such as alcohol and tobacco, as well as to other conditions beyond infectious/contagious diseases and overdose.

Changes in public order after the opening of an overdose monitoring facility for people who inject drugs

BACKGROUND

In the face of an increasingly fatal opioid crisis, Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program (BHCHP) opened the Supportive Place for Observation and Treatment (SPOT), a unique low-threshold harm reduction program for monitoring people who have injected drugs and are at imminent risk of overdose. This study examines the impact of the opening of the SPOT program on measures of injection drug-related public order in the neighborhood surrounding the facility.

METHODS

Data was collected at 10 weeks prior and 12 weeks post SPOT implementation on: number of over-sedated individuals in public, publicly discarded syringes, publicly discarded injection-related litter, and instances of active injection drug use or exchange of drugs. Changes were evaluated using Poisson log-linear regression models. Potential confounders such as weather and police presence were measured and controlled for.

RESULTS

The average number of over-sedated individuals observed in public significantly decreased by 28% (4.3 [95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.7-6.9] v 3.1 [CI 1.4-6.8]) after SPOT opened. The opening of SPOT did not have a significant effect on the other measures of public order. The daily average number of publicly discarded syringes (28.5 [CI 24.5-33.1] v 28.4 [CI 22.0-36.5]), pieces of publicly discarded injection-related litter (376.3 [CI 358.6-394.8] v 375.0 [CI 345.8-406.6]), and observed instances of active use or exchange of drugs (0.2 [CI 0.1-0.9] v 0.1 [CI 0.0-0.1]) were not statistically significantly different after the opening of SPOT.

CONCLUSIONS

The opening of SPOT was associated with a significant decrease in observed over-sedated individuals. Other measures of injection-drug related public order did not improve or worsen with the opening of SPOT, however, they have been shown to improve with the implementation of a supervised injection facility.

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.

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.

Uptake of wheel-filtration among clients of a supervised injecting facility: Can structured education work?

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Wheel-filtration of pharmaceutical opioid tablets is a recognised harm reduction strategy, but uptake of the practice among people who inject drugs is low. The study aimed to: (i) examine perceptions of filtration practices; (ii) provide structured education on wheel-filtration; and (iii) assess uptake of the practice.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Frequent opioid tablet injectors (n = 30) attending a supervised injecting facility in Sydney, Australia, received hands-on instruction on wheel-filtration based on recommended practice. Pre-education, post-education and follow-up questionnaires were administered.

RESULTS

Wheel-filtration was generally regarded as better than cotton-filtration (the typical method) in terms of perceived effects on health, ease of use and overall drug effect. Sixty-eight percent of those who said they would try wheel-filtration after the education had actually done so. Of those who usually used cotton-filtration, over half (60%) had used wheel-filtration two weeks later.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Uptake of safer preparation methods for pharmaceutical opioid tablets increases after structured education in wheel-filtration. Findings suggest that SIFs are an effective site for this kind of education. Supervised injecting facility workers are uniquely positioned to provide harm reduction education at the time of injection. [Steele M, Silins E, Flaherty I, Hiley S, van Breda N, Jauncey M. Uptake of wheel-filtration among clients of a supervised injecting facility: Can structured education work? Drug Alcohol Rev 2018;37:116-120].

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.

Public opinions about supervised smoking facilities for crack cocaine and other stimulants

Background

The purpose of this study was to estimate awareness and opinions about supervised smoking facilities (SSFs) for smoking crack cocaine and other stimulants and make comparisons with awareness and opinions about supervised injection facilities (SIFs) in Ontario, Canada.

Methods

We used data from a 2009 telephone survey of a representative adult sample. The survey asked about awareness of, and level of support for, the implementation of SSFs and SIFs. Data were analysed using statistical models for complex survey data, which account for stratified sampling and incorporate sampling weights.

Results

A total of 1035 participated in the survey. Significantly fewer had knowledge about SSFs (17.9 %) than about SIFs (57.6 %). Fewer strongly agreed with implementation of SSFs (19.6 %) than SIFs (28.3 %). Just over half (51.1 %) of participants somewhat agreed or disagreed, 15.7 % strongly agreed, and 10.6 % strongly disagreed with implementing both SSFs and SIFs.

Conclusions

Members of the public in Ontario had little knowledge of SSFs compared to SIFs. Recent federal government changes in Canada may provide the leadership environment necessary to ensure that innovative, evidence-based harm reduction programs such as SSFs are developed and implemented.

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.

Increasing public support for supervised injection facilities in Ontario, Canada

AIM

To determine the level and changes in public opinion between 2003 and 2009 among adult Canadians about implementation of supervised injection facilities (SIFs) in Canada.

DESIGN

Population-based, telephone survey data collected in 2003 and 2009 were analysed to identify strong, weak, and intermediate support for SIFs.

SETTING

Ontario, Canada

PARTICIPANTS

Representative samples of adults aged 18 years and over.

MEASUREMENTS

Analyses of the agreement with implementation of SIFs in relation to four individual SIF goals and a composite measure.

FINDINGS

The final sample sizes for 2003 and 2009 were 1212 and 968, respectively. Between 2003 and 2009, there were increases in the proportion of participants who strongly agreed with implementing SIFs to: reduce neighbourhood problems (0.309 versus 0.556, respectively); increase contact of people who use drugs with health and social workers (0.257 versus 0.479, respectively); reduce overdose deaths or infectious disease among people who use drugs (0.269 versus 0.482, respectively); and encourage safer drug injection (0.213 versus 0.310, respectively). Analyses using a composite measure of agreement across goals showed that 0.776 of participants had mixed opinions about SIFs in 2003, compared with only 0.616 in 2009. There was little change among those who strongly disagreed with all SIF goals (0.091 versus 0.113 in 2003 and 2009, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Support for implementation of supervised injection facilities in Ontario, Canada increased between 2003 and 2009, but at both time-points a majority still held mixed opinions.

Identifying provider beliefs related to contingency management adoption using the contingency management beliefs questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Contingency management (CM) is a widely recognized empirically-supported addiction treatment; however, dissemination and adoption of CM into routine clinical practice has been slow. Assessment of beliefs about CM may highlight key barriers and facilitators of adoption and inform dissemination efforts. In the present study, we developed a 35-item questionnaire (contingency management beliefs questionnaire; CMBQ) assessing CM beliefs and examined the relation of these beliefs to clinician characteristics and clinical practices.

METHODS

The web-based study was completed by 617 substance abuse treatment providers. We examined the factor structure using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) in a randomly selected half-sample (n=318) and evaluated the generalizability of the solution using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in the second half-sample (n=299).

RESULTS

EFA results suggested a 3-factor solution with 32 items retained; factors represented general barriers, training-related barriers, and pro-CM items. CFA results supported the solution, and reliability was good within each half-sample (α=0.88 and 0.90). Therapeutic approach, years experience in addictions field, perception of CM's research support, prior CM training, and CM adoption interest were significantly associated with the factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, participants viewed CM favorably yet endorsed barriers, indicating a need for more extensive and targeted response to the most common misperceptions in dissemination efforts.

Accidental Intimacy: Transformative Emotion and the Sydney Medically Supervised Injecting Centre

This article widens the debate surrounding supervised injecting facilities (SIFs) by exploring an aspect of SIFs yet to be examined in the scholarly literature: the relationships created between staff and clients within these settings. By analyzing entries made in the Sydney Medically Supervised Injecting Centre's (MSIC) client comment books we explore the centrality of emotional connection to clients' experiences of the service. We argue that the everyday contact between staff and clients—including the “accidental intimacy” that develops when clients inject in the presence of staff —counters the sensations of shame identified by many in the comment books, creating new relations, and new performative possibilities for the production of self, belonging and citizenship for clients of the service. In exploring the role of emotions in the operation of the MSIC we also aim to highlight the political, policy, and clinical value of qualitative forms of inquiry for the harm-reduction field.