Experiences with take-home dosing in heroin-assisted treatment in Switzerland during the COVID-19 pandemic-Is an update of legal restrictions warranted?

Prolonged diacetylmorphine take-home during the COVID-19 pandemic-Results of a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Legal regulations for dispensing in Swiss heroin-assisted treatment were relaxed during the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing prolonged take-home of up to 7 days instead of two to reduce patient contact and the risk of infection. Our study aimed to measure the consequences of this new practice.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a retrospective cohort study set in Switzerland's largest outpatient centre for opioid agonist therapy. One hundred and thirty-four (72.4%) of the 185 patients receiving oral diacetylmorphine (DAM) participated in the study.

MEASUREMENTS

Through the utilization of electronic medication prescription and dispensing software, as well as the electronic medical record, the following data were extracted to explore the potential consequences: dose of DAM, the number of antibiotic therapies, emergency hospitalizations and incarcerations. Age, gender, prescriptions for psychotrophic drugs and additional prescription for injectable DAM were tested to assess an increased risk of losing prolonged take-home privileges. Data in the year since prolonged take-home (period 2) were compared with data from the equivalent prior year (period 1).

FINDINGS

DAM take-home was not associated with a change in DAM dose (P = 0.548), the number of emergency hospitalizations (P = 0.186) or the number of incarcerations (P = 0.215); 79.1% of all patients were able to maintain their extended take-home privileges. However, patients who had injectable DAM experienced significant reductions in their prolonged take-home privileges.

CONCLUSION

Allowing patients to take home oral diacetylmorphine for up to 7 days as treatment for opioid use disorder does not appear to pose any demonstrable health risk. It is generally manageable for the large majority of patients. However, careful consideration of prolonged take-home for patients with additional injectable diacetylmorphine is recommended, as these patients are more likely to lose take-home privileges.

"If it wasn't for them, I don't think I would be here": experiences of the first year of a safer supply program during the dual public health emergencies of COVID-19 and the drug toxicity crisis

BACKGROUND

In response to the devastating drug toxicity crisis in Canada driven by an unregulated opioid supply predominantly composed of fentanyl and analogues, safer supply programs have been introduced. These programs provide people using street-acquired opioids with prescribed, pharmaceutical opioids. We use six core components of safer supply programs identified by people who use drugs to explore participant perspectives on the first year of operations of a safer supply program in Victoria, BC, during the dual public health emergencies of COVID-19 and the drug toxicity crisis to examine whether the program met drug-user defined elements of an effective safer supply model.

METHODS

This study used a community-based participatory research approach to ensure that the research was reflective of community concerns and priorities, rather than being extractive. We interviewed 16 safer supply program participants between December 2020 and June 2021. Analysis was structured using the six core components of effective safer supply from the perspective of people who use drugs, generated through a prior study.

RESULTS

Ensuring access to the 'right dose and right drugs' of medications was crucial, with many participants reporting success with the available pharmaceutical options. However, others highlighted issues with the strength of the available medications and the lack of options for smokeable medications. Accessing the safer supply program allowed participants to reduce their use of drugs from unregulated markets and manage withdrawal, pain and cravings. On components related to program operations, participants reported receiving compassionate care, and that accessing the safer supply program was a non-stigmatizing experience. They also reported receiving support to find housing, access food, obtain ID, and other needs. However, participants worried about long term program sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants in the safer supply program overwhelmingly appreciated it and felt it was lifesaving, and unlike other healthcare or treatment services they had previously accessed. Participants raised concerns that unless a wider variety of medications and ability to consume them by multiple routes of administration became available, safer supply programs would remain unable to completely replace substances from unregulated markets.

Implementation of pharmaceutical alternatives to a toxic drug supply in British Columbia: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

North America has been in an unrelenting overdose crisis for almost a decade. British Columbia (BC), Canada declared a public health emergency due to overdoses in 2016. Risk Mitigation Guidance (RMG) for prescribing pharmaceutical opioids, stimulants and benzodiazepine alternatives to the toxic drug supply ("safer supply") was implemented in March 2020 in an attempt to reduce harms of COVID-19 and overdose deaths in BC during dual declared public health emergencies. Our objective was to describe early implementation of RMG among prescribers in BC.

METHODS

We conducted a convergent mixed methods study drawing population-level linked administrative health data and qualitative interviews with 17 prescribers. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) informs our work. The study utilized seven linked databases, capturing the characteristics of prescribers for people with substance use disorder to describe the characteristics of those prescribing under the RMG using univariate summary statistics and logistic regression analysis. For the qualitative analysis, we drew on interpretative descriptive methodology to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation.

RESULTS

Analysis of administrative databases demonstrated limited uptake of the intervention outside large urban centres and a highly specific profile of urban prescribers, with larger and more complex caseloads associated with RMG prescribing. Nurse practitioners were three times more likely to prescribe than general practitioners. Qualitatively, the study identified five themes related to the five CFIR domains: 1) RMG is helpful but controversial; 2) Motivations and challenges to prescribing; 3) New options and opportunities for care but not enough to 'win the arms race'; 4) Lack of implementation support and resources; 5) Limited infrastructure.

CONCLUSIONS

BC's implementation of RMG was limited in scope, prescriber uptake and geographic scale up. Systemic, organizational and individual barriers and facilitators point to the importance of engaging professional regulatory colleges, implementation planning and organizational infrastructure to ensure effective implementation and adaptation to context.

Evaluation of heroin-assisted treatment in Norway: protocol for a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) has a convincing evidence base, although variable retention rates suggest that it may not be beneficial for all. One of the options to include more patients is the introduction of heroin-assisted treatment (HAT), which involves the prescribing of pharmaceutical heroin in a clinical supervised setting. Clinical trials suggest that HAT positively affects illicit drug use, criminal behavior, quality of life, and health. The results are less clear for longer-term outcomes such as mortality, level of function and social integration. This protocol describes a longitudinal evaluation of the introduction of HAT into the OAT services in Norway over a 5-year period. The main aim of the project is to study the individual, organizational and societal effects of implementing HAT in the specialized healthcare services for OUD.

METHODS

The project adopts a multidisciplinary approach, where the primary cohort for analysis will consist of approximately 250 patients in Norway, observed during the period of 2022-2026. Cohorts for comparative analysis will include all HAT-patients in Denmark from 2010 to 2022 (N = 500) and all Norwegian patients in conventional OAT (N = 8300). Data comes from individual in-depth and semi-structured interviews, self-report questionnaires, clinical records, and national registries, collected at several time points throughout patients' courses of treatment. Qualitative analyses will use a flexible inductive thematic approach. Quantitative analyses will employ a wide array of methods including bi-variate parametric and non-parametric tests, and various forms of multivariate modeling.

DISCUSSION

The project's primary strength lies in its comprehensive and longitudinal approach. It has the potential to reveal new insights on whether pharmaceutical heroin should be an integral part of integrated conventional OAT services to individually tailor treatments for patients with OUD. This could affect considerations about drug treatment even beyond HAT-specific topics, where an expanded understanding of why some do not succeed with conventional OAT will strengthen the knowledge base for drug treatment in general. Results will be disseminated to the scientific community, clinicians, and policy makers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was approved by the Norwegian Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REK), ref.nr.:195733.

Who receives heroin-assisted treatment? A comparison of patients receiving opioid maintenance treatment in Denmark

BACKGROUND

Since 2010, heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) has been one of the treatment options available to people with opioid use disorder (OUD) in Denmark. This study aimed to characterize HAT patients at treatment start and compare their individual characteristics to those of patients entering traditional opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) with methadone or buprenorphine during the same period.

METHODS

Patients who initiated HAT or OMT with methadone or buprenorphine in Denmark from 2010 to 2018 were included (n=6798). Multiple national registers were linked to compare treatment groups in terms of socio-demographic variables, previous OUD treatment episodes, hospital-based care, and criminal conviction history.

RESULTS

Nearly all HAT patients had a history of methadone treatment (91%) and half had residential treatment experience (48%). In the year previous to admission, HAT patients recorded the highest percentages of non-fatal overdoses (12%) and chronic hepatitis C diagnoses (16%), and the lowest percentages of psychiatric disorders (11%) compared to traditional OMT patients. Criminal convictions were also common: 39% of the HAT group had committed a property crime and 18% a drug-related crime the year before HAT entry. During the study period, an overall reduction in OMT enrollments for each year was recorded. The HAT proportion to the total remained fairly stable (4%-10%), while the buprenorphine proportion increased.

CONCLUSIONS

In Denmark, OMT patients exhibited numerous vulnerabilities at treatment start, and among the patient groups, HAT patients were the most burdened. HAT seems to reach the target group and adhere to formulated eligibility criteria.

Opioid agonist treatment in transition: A cross-country comparison between Austria, Germany and Switzerland

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

OAT is a well developed and successful treatment strategy for opioid dependent patients in Europe. It has significantly contributed to the fight against the HIV and HCV pandemics, leading to an increased life expectancy in this population. Building on the OAT experiences in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland and their models of care, the objective of this study is to analyse experiences and changes in patient structures to identify necessary adaptations for the system of care.

METHODS

We analysed national register-based data from patients receiving OAT during the period spanning from 2010 to 2020 in Austria, Germany (cases), and Switzerland. We examined and compared OAT policies and practice at national levels through a review of literature and publicly available policy documents.

RESULTS

Across these three countries, the life expectancy of OAT patients increased substantially. The mean age increased from 33.0 in 2010 to 39.1 in 2020 in Austria, from 35.6 years to 41.5 years in Germany (cases), and from 39.6 to 47.1 in Switzerland, respectively. In all three countries, the percentage of patients/cases aged 60 years and older increased more than tenfold between 2010 and 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated support models, reliable care structures, internationally comparable high treatment coverage, flexible prescribing practices, and a wide range of available OAT medications are successful strategies. The experiences in these countries indicate that it is possible to address the complex and chronic nature of opioid dependence and its concurrent mental and physical health challenges, resulting in an increasing life expectancy of OAT patients.

Supervised on-site dosing in injectable opioid agonist treatment-considering the patient perspective. Findings from a cross-sectional interview study in two German cities

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is an effective option to support people living with opioid use disorder (OUD) who have not sufficiently benefitted from oral OAT. However, iOAT has been criticised based on theoretical and practical grounds for its dosing policies: Current regulations demand supervised, on-site application and require patients to frequently visit their treatment facility. The current study aims to investigate how patients experience on-site application and derive strategies to enhance the acceptability and effectiveness of iOAT-delivery.

METHODS

This article is based on semi-structured interviews with 27 individuals currently or previously in iOAT in two German outpatient iOAT-clinics. We undertook an inductive qualitative content analysis, which included blinded, independent coding and the analysis of individual cases.

RESULTS

Comments regarding on-site application and daily visits to the clinic were grouped into positive and negative aspects, iOAT as the best alternative option, facilitators of daily visits, and suggestions for improvement. Positive aspects took the factors stability and social support in regard. Negative aspects ranged from general inconveniences to major impediments to individuals' daily lives and towards achieving psychosocial goals. Participants reported rigorous adherence to iOAT's treatment regime, often due to a perceived lack of alternative options. Meeting iOAT's demands was eased by the patients' coping-strategies and through facilitating measures implemented by iOAT-clinics. Despite acknowledgement of the potential detriments from easing regulations, take-home arrangements were frequently suggested by participants to improve iOAT.

CONCLUSIONS

Being required to attend the clinic for supervised iOAT-application is not experienced uniformly. While clinics can support their patients to cope with strict regulations, alternative approaches to iOAT-application should be considered to accommodate patients' individual needs. Examples from other treatment modalities (e.g., remote supervision and delivery services) might aid to reconcile individualisation while providing adequate safety measures and improve iOAT in the long term.

Shifting drug markets in North America - a global crisis in the making?

Understanding drug market dynamics and their underlying driving factors is paramount to developing effective responses to the overdose crisis in North America. This paper summarises the distinct drug market trends observed locally and internationally over the past decade to extrapolate future drug market trajectories. The emergence of fentanyl on North American street markets from 2014 onwards led to a shift of street drug use patterns. Previously perceived as contaminants, novel synthetic opioids became the drugs of choice and a trend towards higher potency was observed across various substance classes. The diversification of distribution strategies as well as the regionalisation and industrialisation of production followed basic economic principles that were heavily influenced by prosecution and policy makers. Particularly, the trend towards higher potency is likely most indicative of what to expect from future illicit drug market developments. Nitazenes and fentanyl-analogues, several times more potent than fentanyl itself, are increasingly detected in toxicological testing and have the potential of becoming the drugs of choice in the future. The dynamic of drug import and local production is less clear and influenced by a multitude of factors like precursor availability, know-how, infrastructure, and the success of local drug enforcement strategies. Drug market dynamics and the current trajectory towards ultrapotent opioids need to be recognised by legislation, enforcement, and the health care system to prepare effective responses. Without significant improvements in treatment access, the implementation of preventative approaches and early warning systems, the mortality rate will continue to increase. Furthermore, there is no mechanism in place preventing the currently North American focused overdose crisis to spread to other parts of the globe, particularly Europe. A system of oversight, research, and treatment is needed to address mortality rates of historic proportions and prevent further harm.

Patients' satisfaction with heroin-assisted treatment: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) involves supervised dispensing of medical heroin (diacetylmorphine) for people with opioid use disorder. Clinical evidence has demonstrated the effectiveness of HAT, but little is known about the self-reported satisfaction among the patients who receive this treatment. This study presents the first empirical findings about the patients' experiences of, and satisfaction with, HAT in the Norwegian context.

METHODS

Qualitative in-depth interviews with 26 patients in HAT were carried out one to two months after their enrollment. Analysis sought to identify the main benefits and challenges that the research participants experienced with this treatment. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted to identify the main areas of benefits and challenges. The benefits were weighed against the challenges in order to assess the participants' overall level of treatment satisfaction.

RESULTS

Analysis identified three different areas of experienced benefits and three areas of challenges of being in this treatment. It outlines how the participants' everyday lives are impacted by being in the treatment and how this, respectively, results from the treatment's medical, relational, or configurational dimensions. We found an overall high level of treatment satisfaction among the participants. The identification of experienced challenges reveals factors that reduce satisfaction and thus may hinder treatment retention and positive treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrates a novel approach to qualitatively investigate patients' treatment satisfaction across different treatment dimensions. The findings have implications for clinical practice by pointing out key factors that inhibit and facilitate patients' satisfaction with HAT. The identified importance of the socio-environmental factors and relational aspect of the treatment has further implications for the provision of opioid agonist treatment in general.

Changes in daily dose in open-label compared to double-blind: The role of clients' expectations in injectable opioid agonist treatment

Introduction

Though double-blind studies have indicated that hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine produce similar effects when administered through injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) programs, participant preference may influence some aspects of medication dispensation such as dose.

Methods

 This is a retrospective longitudinal analysis. Participants (n = 131) were previously enrolled in a double-blind clinical trial for iOAT who continued to receive treatment in an open-label follow up study. Data included medication dispensation records from 2012 to 2020. Using linear regression and paired t-tests, average daily dose totals of hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine were examined comparatively between double-blind and open-label periods. A subgroup analysis explored dose difference by preference using the proxy, blinding guess, a variable used to facilitate the measurement of treatment masking during the clinical trial by asking which medication the participant thought they received.

Results

During the open-label period, participants prescribed diacetylmorphine received 49.5 mg less than during the double-blind period (95% CI -12.6,-86.4). Participants receiving hydromorphone did not see a significant dose decrease. Participants who guessed they received hydromorphone during the clinical trial, but learned they were on diacetylmorphine during the open-label period, saw a decrease in total daily dose of 78.3 mg less (95% CI -134.3,-22.4) during the open-label period.

Conclusion

If client preference is considered in the treatment of chronic opioid use disorder, clients may be able to better moderate their dose to suit their individual needs. Together with their healthcare providers, clients can participate in their treatment trajectories collaboratively to optimize client outcomes and promote person-centered treatment options.

Clients' experiences on North America's first take-home injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) program: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

To support public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, oral opioid agonist treatment (OAT) take-home doses were expanded in Western countries with positive results. Injectable OAT (iOAT) take-home doses were previously not an eligible option, and were made available for the first time in several sites to align with public health measures. Building upon these temporary risk-mitigating guidelines, a clinic in Vancouver, BC continued to offer two of a possible three daily doses of take-home injectable medications to eligible clients. The present study explores the processes through which take-home iOAT doses impacted clients' quality of life and continuity of care in real-life settings.

METHODS

Three rounds of semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted over a period of seventeen months beginning in July 2021 with eleven participants receiving iOAT take-home doses at a community clinic in Vancouver, British Columbia. Interviews followed a topic guide that evolved iteratively in response to emerging lines of inquiry. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then coded using NVivo 1.6 using an interpretive description approach.

RESULTS

Participants reported that take-home doses granted them the freedom away from the clinic to have daily routines, form plans, and enjoy unstructured time. Participants appreciated the greater privacy, accessibility, and ability to engage in paid work. Furthermore, participants enjoyed greater autonomy to manage their medication and level of engagement with the clinic. These factors contributed to greater quality of life and continuity of care. Participants shared that their dose was too essential to divert and that they felt safe transporting and administering their medication off-site. In the future, all participants would like more accessible treatment such as access longer take-home prescriptions (e.g., one week), the ability to pick-up at different and convenient locations (e.g., community pharmacies), and a medication delivery service.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing the number of daily onsite injections from two or three to only one revealed the diversity of rich and nuanced needs that added flexibility and accessibility in iOAT can meet. Actions such as licencing diverse opioid medications/formulations, medication pick-up at community pharmacies, and a community of practice that supports clinical decisions are necessary to increase take-home iOAT accessibility.

'This is hardcore': a qualitative study exploring service users' experiences of Heroin-Assisted Treatment (HAT) in Middlesbrough, England

BACKGROUND

Heroin-Assisted Treatment (HAT) is well evidenced internationally to improve health and social outcomes for people dependent on opioids who have not been helped by traditional treatment options. Despite this evidence base, England has been slow to implement HAT. The first service outside of a trial setting opened in 2019, providing twice-daily supervised injections of medical-grade heroin (diamorphine) to a select sample of high-risk heroin users in Middlesbrough. This paper explores their experiences, including the negotiation of the strict regularly controls required of a novel intervention in the UK context.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with service providers and users of the Middlesbrough HAT service between September and November 2021. Data from each group were thematically analysed and reported separately. This paper details the experiences of the twelve heroin dependent men and women accessing HAT.

RESULTS

Participants' accounts of HAT treatment evidenced a tension between the regulatory constraints and uncertainty of treatment provision, and the positive outcomes experienced through supportive service provision and an injectable treatment option. Limited confidence was held in treatment efficacy, longevity of funding, and personal capacity for treatment success. This was counteracted by a strong motivation to cease engagement with the illicit drug market. While attendance requirements placed restrictions on daily activities, participants also experienced benefits from strong, supportive bonds built with the service providers through their continued engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

The Middlesbrough HAT programme provided benefits to a high-risk population of opioid dependent people who were unable or disinclined to participate in conventional opioid substitution treatments. The findings in this paper highlight the potential for service modifications to further enhance engagement. The closure of this programme in 2022 prohibits this opportunity for the Middlesbrough community, but holds potential to inform advocacy and innovation for future HAT interventions in England.

More than just 'free heroin': Caring whilst navigating constraint in the delivery of diamorphine assisted treatment

BACKGROUND

In 2020, drug related deaths in the United Kingdom (UK) reached the highest rate in over 25 years, with hospitalisations and deaths particularly impacting people who use illicit opioids such as heroin. Treatment systems are increasingly required to be innovative to engage the most vulnerable at risk from premature morbidity and mortality. Heroin Assisted Treatment (HAT) is an alternative treatment modality for people for whom more traditional forms of opioid substitution therapy, such as methadone, have been ineffective. Middlesbrough, a town in the North-East England, was home to the first service in the UK to implement HAT outside of a clinical trial setting which closed for operation in November 2022.

METHODS

Qualitative in-depth interviews with patients and health care providers (n =17) involved in the delivery of HAT were undertaken during 2021. This paper focuses on the health care provider interviews, the majority of which took place remotely. Interviews were audio recorded and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Health care providers navigated multiple layers of constraint during HAT implementation and delivery. We explore this in relation to three themes: 1) Negotiating risk and safety within treatment 2) More than a prescription: care beyond diamorphine 3) Internal and external delivery barriers and impact on treatment acceptability, identity and longevity. Negotiating and managing risks of polysubstance use was a complex task. Benefits regarding access to holistic care, improved therapeutic and social relationships were recognised by practitioners. The rigorous delivery schedule was the biggest barrier to engagement. Outside the treatment room, socio-structural factors posed additional challenges.

CONCLUSION

Despite some operational complexities, health care providers viewed HAT as an effective method of engaging a high risk population with drug treatment services, with holistic benefits for clients over and above the treatment of opioid dependency. Findings will inform advocacy and innovation for future HAT interventions in England.

The Fentanyl System Shock - Are There Lessons to Learn From the COVID-19 System Shock Framework? Comment on "The COVID-19 System Shock Framework: Capturing Health System Innovation During the COVID-19 Pandemic"

The Sydney Children's Hospitals Network (SCHN) addressed the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic by implementing innovative changes which made their health system resilient and responsive. For other healthcare systems, there are important takeaways. In the United States and Canada, an urgent widespread response is needed to address the overdose crisis, driven by potent synthetic opioids (ie, fentanyl and its derivates). We project the COVID-19 System Shock Framework (CSSF) on to the North American healthcare systems and suggest a Fentanyl System Shock Framework, which provides a framework for necessary changes and innovations to address the overdose crisis. To become resilient to the fentanyl system shock, core components as well as overarching values, health policy, and online technologies need to be adapted to reduce the death count and meet the evolving needs of marginalised individuals who use opioid. Future research should focus on scientifically assessing such implementations to guide evidence-based decision making.

Safety and feasibility of intranasal heroin-assisted treatment: 4-week preliminary findings from a Swiss multicentre observational study

BACKGROUND

Heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) is effective for individuals with severe opioid use disorder (OUD) who do not respond sufficiently to other opioid agonist treatments. It is mostly offered with injectable diacetylmorphine (DAM) or DAM tablets creating a barrier for individuals who need the rapid onset of action but are either unable or unwilling to inject, or primarily snort opioids. To explore another route of administration, we evaluated the safety and feasibility of intranasal (IN) DAM.

METHODS

This is a multicentre observational cohort study among patients in Swiss HAT. All patients planning to receive IN DAM within the treatment centres were eligible to participate. Participants were either completely switched to IN DAM or received IN DAM in addition to other DAM formulations or opioid agonists. Patients were followed up for four weeks. Sociodemographic characteristics, current HAT regimen, reasons for starting IN DAM, IN DAM doses, number of injection events in the sample, IN DAM continuation rate, and appearance of adverse events and nose-related problems were evaluated.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 52) reported vein damage, preference for nasal route of administration, and desire of a stronger effect or for a less harmful route of administration as primary reasons for switching to IN DAM. After four weeks, 90.4% of participants (n = 47) still received IN DAM. Weekly average realised injection events decreased by 44.4% from the month before IN DAM initiation to the month following. No severe adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

After four weeks, IN DAM was a feasible and safe alternative to other routes of administration for patients with severe OUD in HAT. It addressed the needs of individuals with OUD and reduced injection behaviour. More long-term research efforts are needed to systematically assess efficacy of and patient satisfaction with IN DAM.

Nasal administration of diacetylmorphine improved the adherence in a patient receiving heroin-assisted treatment

Background

Traditional heroin-assisted treatment in Switzerland consists of oral and injectable diacetylmorphine (pharmaceutical heroin) administration. To date, no suitable treatment option is available for patients who crave rapid onset (“rush”) but are either unable to inject or primarily sniff or inhale illicit heroin. We present a patient who successfully switched to intranasal heroin-assisted treatment following several unsuccessful treatment attempts.

Case presentation

A 29-year-old male with severe opioid use disorder, injection substance use, and concomitant cocaine use, previously prescribed slow-release oral morphine, was started on intravenous diacetylmorphine. Due to complications and harms associated with intravenous injections, nasal diacetylmorphine was prescribed. With this novel route of administration, the patient who had previously been unable to adhere to other OAT options remained in treatment. Health outcomes improved by reduction of injection-related harms, increased adherence to the heroin-assisted treatment regimen, and increased collaboration with the therapeutic staff.

Conclusions

Nasal heroin-assisted treatment can be a feasible therapeutic option for individuals with severe opioid use disorder who crave the fast onset of effect of diacetylmorphine but are unable to inject intravenously.