Harm Reduction: Front Line Public Health

Financial barriers, facilitators, and strategies among syringe services programs in the U.S., and their impact on implementation and health outcomes

Syringe Services Programs (SSPs) provide evidence-based services like drug use equipment to prevent infectious disease, overdose prevention education, and naloxone distribution to people who use drugs (PWUD). However, inadequate funding threatens provision of these interventions. This study aimed to document how the current funding landscape impacted determinants of SSP implementation, particularly describing financial and staffing barriers, facilitators, and proposed strategies, using qualitative methods informed by three implementation research frameworks. We interviewed 20 leaders of SSPs in the United States using a semi-structured interview guide. Participants described how structural stigma against PWUD led to insufficient and restrictive funding, and burdensome reporting for SSPs. This resulted in harming program implementation outcomes like reach, fidelity, and sustainability. Inadequate funding also led to insufficient staffing and subsequent staff stress, burnout, and turnover. Taken together, these barriers threatened the implementation of evidence-based interventions that SSPs provided, ultimately harming their ability to effectively address health outcomes like infectious disease transmission and opioid overdose mortality within their communities. Interviewees described how upstream policy strategies like political advocacy might address structural stigma at the federal level. Participants also highlighted state-level efforts like harm reduction-centered funding, technical assistance and capacity-building, and clearinghouse programs that may facilitate better implementation and health outcomes. A more robust understanding of the relationship between financial barriers, facilitators, and strategies on implementation and health outcomes represents a novel and vital area of research within harm reduction literature.

Cannabis vaporisation: Understanding products, devices and risks

ISSUES

Vaporisation is a common method of cannabis administration. Inconsistent terminology and jargon regarding vaporisation has led to confusion. The increasing public interest and access to cannabis, combined with possible safety concerns associated with certain cannabis vaping products, warrants improved consumer and public and health care professional knowledge.

APPROACH

To improve this knowledge, we conducted a review of the common terminology, regulatory status, products and device types related to cannabis vaporisation.

KEY FINDINGS

Cannabis vaporisation devices can be separated into nine types. While vaporisation reduces respiratory risks associated with cannabis combustion, not all vaping products and device types carry the same level of safety. Metered dose inhalers and dried product vaporisers present the lowest safety risk due to a lower risk of toxin exposure and the use of lower tetrahydrocannabinol potency products.

IMPLICATIONS

As both vaping and cannabis use increase in popularity, focusing on accurate health education will help facilitate health promotion to encourage lower risk use. The current lack of understanding on risk differences between types of cannabis vaporisation is a missed opportunity for harm reduction. Increased opportunities for public health and health care professional education on different cannabis vaporisation devices and associated risks are warranted. Improvements to health warning labelling may also be beneficial.

CONCLUSION

Not all cannabis vaporisation devices and products carry the same level of risk. A better understanding of risk differentiation is needed among consumers and health professionals. Continued research, policy development and health education can lead to safer cannabis vaporisation.

Compassionate Care for People with Cancer and Opioid Use Disorder

ABSTRACT

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is an important comorbidity to assess and manage in people with cancer. In this article, the authors discuss strategies for safe opioid management in individuals with OUD and cancer-related pain using a composite case example. They highlight core approaches to pain management, including motivational interviewing, harm reduction, and evidence-based treatments, as well as advocacy for person-centered end-of-life care.

Hospital Experiences of Dignity in People Who Inject Drugs

BACKGROUND

Dignity is a complex concept necessary for the adequate treatment of patients in the healthcare setting. Autonomy, self-sufficiency, respect, and equality are concepts used to define dignity. Dignity has not been studied in people who inject drugs (PWID).

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine how PWID maintain or have their dignity threatened during hospitalization in an acute care unit.

DESIGN

The qualitative descriptive study was a deductive thematic analysis of secondary data on PWID experiences with received nursing care. In-depth, semistructured interviews were conducted and transcribed verbatim with a constant comparison method for thematic analysis using NVivo. A priori codes of dignity concepts from the literature and dignity scales were used as a guide to examine the nine qualitative transcripts.

FINDINGS

The three most common threats to dignity during hospitalization were lack of equality compared with other patients, not feeling valued as an individual, and not feeling respected by the healthcare workers providing care. The three most common protectors of dignity were feeling respected by healthcare workers, having autonomy in treatment choices, and feeling valued as an individual.

CONCLUSIONS

Protecting dignity significantly affects whether PWID are willing to seek healthcare in the hospital setting. Preserving dignity in PWID during their hospitalizations can encourage this population to seek care earlier. Nurses must be experienced in caring for PWID and provide nonjudgmental care for this population.

Clinician's experiences with involuntary commitment for substance use disorder: A qualitative study of moral distress

BACKGROUND

Petitions for involuntary commitment of people living with a substance use disorder (SUD) have almost doubled since 2011 in Massachusetts through the policy Section 35. However, the efficacy of this controversial policy remains unclear, and clinicians differ on whether it ought to be used. This study examines how clinicians decide whether to use Section 35 and their experiences of moral distress, the negative feeling that occurs when a clinician is required to pursue a treatment option against their moral judgement due to institutional constraints, associated with its use.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews with clinicians in Massachusetts were conducted between December 2019 and February 2020 and continued until thematic saturation. Thematic and narrative analysis was conducted with recorded and transcribed interviews.

RESULTS

Among 21 clinicians, most (77%) experienced some or high moral distress when utilizing Section 35 for involuntary commitment, with clinicians working in emergency departments experiencing less distress than those working in SUD clinics. Clinicians with low moral distress referenced successful patient anecdotes and held an abstinence-based view of SUD, while clinicians with high moral distress were concerned by systemic treatment failures and understood SUD through a nuanced and harm reduction-oriented view. Clinicians across professional settings were concerned by the involvement of law enforcement and criminal justice settings in the Section 35 process. Clinicians employed a variety of strategies to cope with moral distress, including team-based decision-making and viewing the petition as a last resort. Barriers to utilizing Section 35 included restrictive court hours and lack of post-section aftercare services.

CONCLUSION

Widespread distress associated with use of involuntary commitment and inconsistent approaches to its use highlight the need for better care coordination and guidance on best practices for utilization of this policy.

Unintended harm: A qualitative study of "harm" upon people who inject drugs in Bangkok, Thailand

Given the highly pervasive health threats faced by people who inject drugs, harm reduction has been implemented in Thailand. Although harm reduction is a particularly effective public health strategy for reducing risky behavior, it is currently practiced with minimal understanding of unintended harm-drug policy, social exclusion, stigma, and discrimination-for people who inject drugs (PWID) in Thailand. This study aims to understanding the "unintended harm" encountered by people who inject drugs in Bangkok in their everyday lives through social interaction at all levels of society from macro, micro, and individual levels. In-depth interviews were conducted with 28 people who inject drugs in Bangkok (21 men and 7 women) and 4 people who are a nurse, a community leader, a policeman, and a family member (2 men and 2 women). The result shows that individuals, society, and politics are not separable phenomena and all produce harm upon people who inject drugs. These unintended harms on the macro, micro, and individual level are closely linked; each in their own way poses a threat to the health and well-being of people who inject drugs and embody negative social responses as the people who inject drugs become typecast as "deviants." In conclusion, there is an urgent need to develop a "harm reduction" model that addresses unintended harm and could be integrated within the existing socio-cultural context of Thai society.

"We're actually more of a likely ally than an unlikely ally": relationships between syringe services programs and law enforcement

Background

Syringe services programs provide sterile injection supplies and a range of health services (e.g., HIV and HEP-C testing, overdose prevention education, provision of naloxone) to a hard-to-reach population, including people who use drugs, aiming to prevent the transmission of infectious diseases.

Methods

We performed a qualitative needs assessment of existing syringe services programs in the state of Colorado in 2018–2019 to describe—their activities, needs, and barriers. Using a phenomenological approach, we performed semi-structured interviews with key program staff of syringe services programs (n = 11). All interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed, and validated. A data-driven iterative approach was used by researchers to develop a coding scheme to organize the data into major themes found across interviews. Memos were written to synthesize main themes.

Results

Nearly all the syringe program staff discussed their relationships with law enforcement at length. All syringe program staff viewed having a positive relationship with law enforcement as critical to the success of their program. Main factors that influence the quality of relationships between syringe services programs and law enforcement included: (1) alignment in agency culture, (2) support from law enforcement leadership, (3) police officers’ participation and compliance with the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) program, which provides intensive case management for low-level drug offenders, and (4) implementation of the “Needle-Stick Prevention Law” and Drug Paraphernalia Law Exemption. All syringe program staff expressed a strong desire to have positive relationships with law enforcement and described how a collaborative working relationship was critical to the success of their programs.

Conclusions

Our findings reveal effective strategies to foster relationships between syringe services programs and law enforcement as well as key barriers to address. The need exists for both syringe services programs and law enforcement to devote time and resources to build a strong, positive partnership. Having such positive relationships with law enforcement has positive implications for syringe services program clients, including law enforcement being less likely to ticket persons for having used syringes, and encourage people who use drugs to seek services from syringe services programs, which can then lead them to other resources, such as housing, wound care, and substance use treatment programs.

The state of harm reduction in prisons in 30 European countries with a focus on people who inject drugs and infectious diseases

BACKGROUND

People who inject drugs are often imprisoned, which is associated with increased levels of health risks including overdose and infectious diseases transmission, affecting not only people in prison but also the communities to which they return. This paper aims to give an up-to-date overview on availability, coverage and policy framework of prison-based harm reduction interventions in Europe.

METHODS

Available data on selected harm reduction responses in prisons were compiled from international standardised data sources and combined with a questionnaire survey among 30 National Focal Points of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction to determine the level of availability, estimated coverage and policy framework of the interventions.

RESULTS

Information about responses to health harms in prisons is limited and heterogeneous. Cross-country comparability is hampered by diverging national data collection methods. Opioid substitution treatment (OST) is available in 29 countries, but coverage remains low (below 30% of people in need) in half of the responding countries. Needle and syringe programmes, lubricant distribution, counselling on safer injecting and tattooing/piercing are scarcely available. Testing for infectious diseases is offered but mostly upon prison entry, and uptake remains low in about half of the countries. While treatment of infections is mostly available and coverage is high for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and tuberculosis, hepatitis B and C treatment are less often provided. Health education as well as condom distribution is usually available, but provision remains low in nearly half of the countries. Post-release linkage to addiction care as well as to treatment of infections is available in a majority of countries, but implementation is often partial. Interventions recommended to be provided upon release, such as OST initiation, take-home naloxone and testing of infections, are rarely provided. While 21 countries address harm reduction in prison in national strategic documents, upon-release interventions appear only in 12.

CONCLUSIONS

Availability and coverage of harm reduction interventions in European prisons are limited, compared to the community. There is a gap between international recommendations and 'on-paper' availability of interventions and their actual implementation. Scaling up harm reduction in prison and throughcare can achieve important individual and public-health benefits.

The application of harm reduction to methamphetamine use during pregnancy: a call to arms

Compared with opioid use disorder, methamphetamine use is a public health crisis that has limited evidence-based pharmacologic interventions for long-term treatment. The prevalence of methamphetamine use during pregnancy is growing and contributes to adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Because of widespread stigma and social complexities associated with methamphetamine use during pregnancy, these patients often experience limited prenatal care, further contributing to poor outcomes. In public health circles, harm reduction describes a framework for conceptualizing substance use by championing health promotion and the safest use of substances, as opposed to the unachievable goal of abstinence. There is limited evidence supporting the application of harm reduction in this population. We call for action and research to investigate how the progressive concept of harm reduction might be applied to mitigate adverse outcomes for obstetrical patients who use methamphetamine.

Drug use and HIV medication adherence in people living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Opioid and cocaine use epidemics continue to be substantial in the United States and intersect with the HIV epidemic. Antiretroviral medication (ARV) adherence is critical for optimum HIV outcomes. While previous research explored harm reduction strategies to prevent HIV spread for people who use drugs (PWUD), little is known about strategies used by PWUD living with HIV to maintain ARV adherence. Methods: We explored whether PWUD modify their drug use explicitly to maintain ARV adherence, and identified factors associated with this process. We conducted 23 semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using a modified framework analysis approach. Results: Participants had a mean age of 54 years and were predominantly male (70%) and non-Hispanic black (65%). Most described periods of being able to adhere to ARVs while still using drugs, difficulty adhering to ARVs while using drugs, and abstinence/near abstinence from drug use. In exploring factors that influenced changes in drug use and ARV adherence behaviors, we noted consistent acknowledgment of the roles of family, partners, or providers. Conclusions: PWUD living with HIV often modify their drug use to improve ARV adherence. Providers caring for this population might consider family or group education models to encourage harm reduction to improve outcomes.

Harm Reduction and Tensions in Trust and Distrust in a Mental Health Service: A Qualitative Approach

BACKGROUND

People seeking care for substance use (PSCSU) experience deep social and health inequities. Harm reduction can be a moral imperative to approach these persons. The purpose of this study was to explore relationships among users, health care providers, relatives, and society regarding harm reduction in mental health care, using a trust approach rooted in feminist ethics.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted in a mental health service for PSCSU, and included fifteen participants who were health care providers, users, and their relatives. Individual in-depth and group interviews, participant observation, and a review of patients' records and service reports were conducted.

RESULTS

Three nested levels of (dis)trust were identified: (dis)trust in the treatment, (dis)trust in the user, and self-(dis)trust of the user, revealing the interconnections among different layers of trust. (Dis)trust at each level can amplify or decrease the potential for a positive therapeutic response in users, their relatives' support, and how professionals act and build innovations in care. Distrust was more abundant than trust in participants' reports, revealing the fragility of trust and the focus on abstinence within this setting.

CONCLUSION

The mismatch between wants and needs of users and the expectations and requirements of a society and mental health care system based on a logic of "fixing" has contributed to distrust and stigma. Therefore, we recommend policies that increase the investment in harm reduction education and practice that target service providers, PSCSU, and society to change the context of distrust identified.