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

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.

Perspectives and recommendations of opioid overdose survivors experiencing unsheltered homelessness on housing, overdose, and substance use treatment in Boston, MA

INTRODUCTION

Opioid overdose causes one in four deaths among people experiencing homelessness in Boston, MA. To reduce overdose risks, the experience and perspectives of people experiencing homelessness should be incorporated into housing, overdose prevention, and substance use treatment efforts.

METHODS

In 2021, we conducted qualitative interviews with 59 opioid overdose survivors to inform equitable access to treatment services. In response to policy debate surrounding a public drug scene near a key recruitment site, we conducted a targeted thematic analysis of transcribed interview data from a subset of participants experiencing unsheltered homelessness (n=29) to explore their perspectives and recommendations on housing, overdose prevention, and substance use treatment.

RESULTS

Among 29 participants who identified as non-Hispanic Black (n=10), Hispanic/Latinx (n=10), or as non-Hispanic White (n=9), the median number of self-reported opioid overdoses in the past three months was 2.0 (SD 3.7). Three themes emerged from this targeted analysis: (1) Participants described inadequate housing resources and unwelcoming shelter environments. (2) Participants near a large public drug scene explained how unsheltered homelessness was chaotic, dangerous, and disruptive to recovery goals. (3) Participants provided recommendations for improving housing and addiction treatment systems and including their perspectives in the development of solutions to the intersecting housing and opioid overdose crises.

CONCLUSIONS

The overdose prevention, housing and substance use treatment systems must address the needs of opioid overdose survivors experiencing unsheltered homelessness. Overdose survivors experiencing unsheltered homelessness described a chaotic public drug scene but resorted to residing in nearby encampments because the existing shelter, housing, and addiction treatment systems were unwelcoming, difficult to navigate, or unaffordable. Despite efforts to provide low-threshold housing in Boston, additional low-barrier housing services (i.e., including harm reduction resources and without "sobriety" requirements) could promote the health and safety of people who use drugs and are experiencing homelessness.

Patient and Provider Perspectives on a Novel, Low-Threshold HIV PrEP Program for People Who Inject Drugs Experiencing Homelessness

BACKGROUND

HIV outbreaks among people who inject drugs (PWID) and experience homelessness are increasing across the USA. Despite high levels of need, multilevel barriers to accessing antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention persist for this population. The Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program (BHCHP) initiated a low-threshold, outreach-based program to support engagement in PrEP services among PWID experiencing homelessness.

METHODS

To inform dissemination efforts, we explored patient and provider perspectives on key program components. From March to December 2020, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with current and former BHCHP PrEP program participants and prescribers, patient navigators, and outreach workers (i.e., providers). Thematic analysis explored perspectives on key program components.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 21) and providers (n = 11) identified the following five key components of BHCHP's PrEP program that they perceived to be particularly helpful for supporting patient engagement in PrEP services: (1) community-driven PrEP education; (2) low-threshold, accessible programming including same-day PrEP prescribing; (3) tailored prescribing supports (e.g., on-site pharmacy, short-term prescriptions, medication storage); (4) intensive outreach and navigation; and (5) trusting, respectful patient-provider relationships.

DISCUSSION

Findings suggest that more patient-centered services formed the basis of BHCHP's innovative, successful PrEP program. While contextual challenges including competing public health emergencies and homeless encampment "sweeps" necessitate ongoing programmatic adaptations, lessons from BHCHP's PrEP program can inform PrEP delivery in a range of community-based settings serving this population, including syringe service programs and shelters.

Indicators of Drug-Related Community Impacts of Open Drug Scenes: A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Places where people deal and/or use drugs publicly are known as open drug scenes (ODSs). Drug-related community impacts (DRCIs) refer to drug-related issues that negatively influence public and individual health, communities, businesses, and recreational and public space enjoyment. There are no well-established criteria for identification of DRCIs. We therefore performed a scoping review of literature to determine DRCIs indicators associated with ODSs.

METHODS

The review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScP). We searched English articles in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases from 1990 to 2021. The keywords were drug-related crime, drug-related offense, misconduct, social marginalization, homeless drug users, open drug scene, drug-related street disorder, public nuisance, and community impact.

RESULTS

Sixty-four studies were identified. Twenty-five studies were included. Two studies (8%) were about drug-related public nuisance, 1 (4%) considered drug-related social problems, 2 (8%) focused on drug-related social disorder, and 18 studies (72%) discussed indicators of community impacts such as crime, drug-related litter, safety, noise, and drug use in public. Two studies (8%) included the frequency of drug use in ODSs.

DISCUSSION

DRCI indicators are heterogenic, and various factors affect the indicators. The factors include social mores, political discourse, and historical approaches to dealing with and using drugs. Some societies do not tolerate the existence of ODSs. In contrast, many countries have adopted harm reduction programs to manage DRCIs. Identified DRCI indicators were drug using and dealing in public, drug-related litter, crime, drug-related loitering, street-based income generation activities, noise, and unsafety feelings in inhabitants. To solve the problems associated with DRCIs and to make a major change in ODSs, it is necessary to pay attention to the improvement of the economic conditions (e.g., employment opportunities), amendment (e.g., determine the limits of criminalization in drug use), and adoption of social policies (e.g., providing low-threshold and supportive services for homeless drug users).