Willingness to use a supervised injection facility among young adults who use prescription opioids non-medically: a cross-sectional study

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

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

Association between willingness to use an overdose prevention center and probation or parole status among people who use drugs in Rhode Island

BACKGROUND

Overdose prevention centers (OPCs) are being implemented in the United States as a strategy to reduce drug-related mortality and morbidity. Previous studies have suggested that people who use drugs (PWUD) with a history of criminal legal system (CLS) involvement (e.g. current probation/parole) are at greater risk of overdose but may also encounter significant barriers to OPC use. The objective of this study was to explore the association between willingness to use an OPC and probation/parole status in a sample of PWUD in Rhode Island.

METHODS

This study utilized data from the Rhode Island Prescription and Illicit Drug Study, which enrolled adult PWUD from August 2020 to February 2023. We used Pearson's chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to assess bivariate associations between willingness to use an OPC and probation/parole status (current/previous/never), as well as other sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics. In multivariable Poisson analyses, we examined the association between willingness to use an OPC and probation/parole status, adjusting for key sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 482 study participants, 67% were male, 56% identified as white, 20% identified as Hispanic/Latine, and the median age was 43 (IQR 35-53). Nearly a quarter (24%) had never been on probation/parole, 44% were not currently on probation/parole but had a lifetime history of probation and parole, and 32% were currently on probation/parole. Most participants (71%) reported willingness to use an OPC, and in both bivariate and multivariable analyses, willingness to use an OPC did not vary by probation/parole status. Crack cocaine use and lifetime non-fatal overdose were associated with greater willingness to use an OPC (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate high willingness to use OPC among PWUD in Rhode Island regardless of CLS-involvement. As OPCs begin to be implemented in Rhode Island, it will be imperative to engage people with CLS-involvement and to ensure access to the OPC and protection against re-incarceration due to potential barriers, such as police surveillance of OPCs.

"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.

The name and frame matters when it comes to public support of opioid prevention programs

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose is the second leading cause of accidental death. Safe Consumption Sites (SCSs) are very effective harm reduction, but skepticism persists in the U.S. In four U.S. states, legislative attempts failed, except for Rhode Island's "Harm Reduction Center," (HRC), and New York City's "Overdose Prevention Centers" (OPP).

METHODS

We hypothesized that compassion naming and framing would rate higher than safety/security or just-the-facts framing. Our mixed methods design included focus groups and a randomized experiment with an online panel of representative U.S. adults. All rated the title, description, and two or more images related to the program. Focus groups discussed impressions.

RESULTS

Of four packets seen (SCS, OPP, HRC, and SIF), OPP was the clear favorite in both studies. Unexpectedly, offering facts and statistics improved favorability. Compassionate language was a primary driver of favorability, followed by life-saving medical messaging. Imagery of people helping and smiling was liked best. Focus groups' primary concern was about "their backyards," but also, they desired to save lives and reduce suffering.

CONCLUSION

Stigma drove opposition to SCSs, as did conservative political affiliation. We provide finalized marketing packets which will reduce stigma and generate public support for SCSs.

High willingness to use overdose prevention sites among suburban people who use drugs who do not inject

INTRODUCTION

Overdose prevention sites (OPS) are evidence-based interventions to improve public health, yet implementation has been limited in the USA due to a variety of legal impediments. Studies in various US settings have shown a high willingness to use OPS among urban and rural people who inject drugs, but data among people who use drugs (PWUD) via non-injection routes of administration in suburban areas are lacking.

METHODS

We utilized cross-sectional data from a sample of suburban PWUD who have not injected drugs in the past 3 months (N = 126) in Anne Arundel County, Maryland. We assessed PWUDs' likelihood of using a hypothetical OPS and perceived potential barriers to accessing OPS. We tested for associations between sociodemographic characteristics, drug use, service access, and overdose experiences with willingness to utilize OPS.

FINDINGS

Participants' median age was 42, and the majority were men (67%) and non-Hispanic Black (79%). Sixty-six percent reported willingness to use an OPS. Concerns about confidentiality (29%), arrest (20%), and transportation costs (22%) were the most anticipated barriers to using OPS. Men (75% vs 55%, p = 0.015), participants who used heroin (53% vs 32%, p = 0.017), and participants who used multiple overdose prevention behaviors (e.g., using fentanyl test strips) (36% vs 19%, p = 0.006) were more likely to report willingness to use OPS.

CONCLUSION

Most suburban non-injecting PWUD in the sample were willing to use an OPS. OPS implementation strategies in suburban settings should be tailored to reach PWUD via non-injection routes of administration while meeting the unique needs of suburban contexts.

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.

Acceptability of supervised injection facilities among persons who inject drugs in upstate New York

BACKGROUND

Supervised injection facilities (SIFs) provide spaces where persons who inject drugs (PWID) can inject under medical supervision and access harm reduction services. Though SIFs are not currently sanctioned in most of the US, such facilities are being considered for approval in several Upstate New York communities. No data exist from PWID in Upstate New York, and little from outside major US urban centers, on willingness to use SIFs and associated factors.

METHODS

This analysis included 285 PWID (mean age = 38.7; 57.7% male; 72.3% non-Hispanic white) recruited for a study on hepatitis C prevalence among PWID in Upstate New York, where participants were recruited from syringe exchange programs (n = 80) and able to refer other PWID from their injection networks (n = 223). Participants completed an electronic questionnaire that included a brief description of SIFs and assessed willingness to use SIFs. We compared sociodemographic characteristics, drug use/harm reduction history, healthcare experience, and stigma between participants who were willing vs. unwilling to use such programs.

RESULTS

Overall, 67.4% were willing to use SIFs, 18.3% unwilling, and 14.4% unsure. Among those reporting being willing or unwilling, we found higher willingness among those who were currently homeless (91.8% vs. 74.6%; p = 0.004), who had interacted with police in the past 12 months (85.7% vs. 74.5%; p = 0.04), and who were refused service within a healthcare setting (100% vs. 77.1%; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Our results support SIF acceptability in several Upstate New York PWID communities, particularly among those reporting feelings of marginalization. A large proportion reported being unsure about usage of SIFs, suggesting room for educating PWID on the potential benefits of this service. Our results support SIF acceptability in Upstate New York and may inform programming for underserved PWID, should SIFs become available.

Stakeholder preferences for supervised consumption site design, staff, and ancillary services: A scoping review of feasibility studies

BACKGROUND

Supervised consumption services (SCS) prevent drug related harms for people who use drugs (PWUD) and often require a feasibility study before implementation. While there is a growing feasibility study literature, it has not been synthesized for use by researchers and SCS planners. We conducted a scoping review of feasibility studies reporting on preferred SCS design characteristics, staffing models and ancillary services.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched academic databases and grey literature sources with key terms related to SCS and feasibility studies. Team members reviewed search results and included feasibility studies with findings relevant to SCS design, staff, or ancillary services. The research methods and findings from included studies regarding design elements were charted, collated, and reported.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1347 results; 26 met eligibility criteria for review. Most reported preferences for SCS location, hours and wait times. Few reported preferences for security, space allocation by type of drug use, and onsite opioid prescribing. PWUD generally preferred aligning design elements with the goal of harm reduction for clients while other stakeholders valued treatment as a goal. Specific considerations varied by implementation context.

CONCLUSIONS

These results can be used by SCS planners and researchers to help resolve implementation concerns and improve uptake among PWUD, which is critical during an overdose crisis. Future feasibility studies should ask about design preferences that may be significant to uptake but are not commonly covered in studies. These should also explore how context influences preferences to develop an evidence-based framework for context-specific design decisions.

Feasibility, acceptability, concerns, and challenges of implementing supervised injection services at a specialty HIV hospital in Toronto, Canada: perspectives of people living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Substance use significantly impacts health and healthcare of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV), especially their ability to remain in hospital following admission. Supervised injection services (SIS) reduce overdoses and drug-related harms, but are not often provided within hospitals/outpatient programs. Leading us to question, what are PLHIV's perceptions of hospital-based SIS?

METHODS

This mixed-methods study explored feasibility and acceptability of implementing SIS at Casey House, a Toronto-based specialty HIV hospital, from the perspective of its in/outpatient clients. We conducted a survey, examining clients' (n = 92) demand for, and acceptability of, hospital-based SIS. Following this, we hosted two focus groups (n = 14) and one-on-one interviews (n = 8) with clients which explored benefits/drawbacks of in-hospital SIS, wherein participants experienced guided tours of a demonstration SIS space and/or presentations of evidence about impacts of SIS. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Among survey participants, 76.1% (n = 70) identified as cis-male and over half (n = 49;54.4%) had been a hospital client for 2 years or less. Nearly half (48.8%) knew about clients injecting in/near Casey House, while 23.6% witnessed it. Survey participants were more supportive of SIS for inpatients (76.1%) than for outpatients (68.5%); most (74.7%) reported SIS implementation would not impact their level of service use at Casey House, while some predicted coming more often (16.1%) and others less often (9.2%). Most focus group/interview participants, believed SIS would enhance safety by reducing health harms (e.g. overdose), increasing transparency between clients and clinicians about substance use, and helping retain clients in care. Debate arose about who (e.g., in/outpatients vs. non-clients) should have access to hospital-based SIS and how implementation may shift organizational priorities/resources away from services not specific to drug use.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data showed widespread support of, and need for, hospital-based SIS among client stakeholders; however, attempts to reduce negative impacts on non-drug using clients need to be considered in the balance of implementation plans. Given the increased risks of morbidity and mortality for PLHIV who inject drugs as well as the problems in retaining them in care in a hospital setting, SIS is a key component of improving care for this marginalized group.

Skin-cleaning among hospitalized people who inject drugs: a randomized controlled trial

AIMS

To test the hypothesis that among hospitalized people who inject drugs (PWID), a brief intervention in skin-cleaning would result in greater reductions in follow-up emergency department (ED) or hospitalization rates compared with a usual care condition.

DESIGN

Randomized, two-group (intervention, n = 128; usual care, n = 124), single-site clinical trial with12-month follow-up.

SETTING

Hospital inpatient services in Boston, Massachusetts, United States.

PARTICIPANTS

People who injected drugs on at least 3 days each week prior to hospital admission (n = 252). Participants averaged 37.9 (± 10.7) years of age; 58.5% were male, 59.3% were white and 61.1% had a diagnosis related to skin infection at enrollment.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Intervention was a skin hygiene education and skills-training behavioral intervention [short-term efficacy data on a behavioral intervention (SKIN)] consisting of two education- and skills-based skin-cleaning sessions, one during hospitalization and another 4 weeks later. The comparator was treatment as usual: an informational brochure about substance use treatment options and needle exchange programs in the area and follow-up clinical appointments as arranged by the inpatient medical staff.

MEASUREMENTS

Electronic medical records were reviewed and discharge diagnoses for each ED visit and hospital admission were categorized into injection-related bacterial events (e.g. cellulitis) and non-injection-related events. Negative binomial regression was used to test the intervention effects for the primary outcome and total ED visits, as well as the secondary outcomes, total number of hospitalizations, injection drug use-related (IDU-related) ED visits and IDU-related hospitalizations. We also tested whether the outcomes were moderated by whether the initial hospitalization was IDU-related.

FINDINGS

Of people assigned to SKIN, 66 completed two sessions, 55 completed one session and seven completed zero sessions. Adjusting for baseline covariates, the mean rate of total ED visits in the next 12 months was non-significantly higher [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.96, 1.33, P = 0.152] compared with usual treatment. The intervention did not significantly reduce total hospitalizations or IDU-related hospitalizations. Adjusting for baseline covariates, the mean rate of injection drug use-related ED visits in the next 12 months was lower (IRR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.35, 0.91, P = 0.019) compared with treatment as usual.

CONCLUSIONS

A skin-cleaning intervention for people who inject drugs delivered during a hospitalization did not significantly reduce either overall emergency department use or hospitalization. There was some evidence that it may have reduced injection drug use-related emergency department visits.

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.

Between Emergency Department Visits: The Role of Harm Reduction Programs in Mitigating the Harms Associated With Injection Drug Use

Injection drug use is a major public health problem in the United States. Cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine are the most commonly injected illicit drugs, whereas opioids are responsible for the majority of overdose fatalities. Although recent emergency department (ED) efforts have focused on expanding capacity for buprenorphine induction for opioid use disorder treatment, the injection of illicit drugs carries specific health risks that require acknowledgment and management, particularly for patients who decline substance use treatment. Harm reduction is a public health approach that aims to reduce the harms associated with a health risk behavior, short of eliminating the behavior itself. Harm-reduction strategies fundamental to emergency medicine include naloxone distribution for opioid overdose. This clinical Review Article examines the specific health complications of injection drug use and reviews the evidence base for 2 interventions effective in reducing morbidity and mortality related to drug injection, irrespective of the specific drug used, that are less well known and infrequently leveraged by emergency medicine clinicians: syringe service programs and supervised injection facilities. In accordance with the recommendations of health authorities such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, emergency clinicians can promote the use of harm-reduction programs in the community to reduce viral transmission and other risks of injection drug use by providing patients with information about and referrals to these programs after injection drug use-related ED visits.

US drug overdose mortality: 2009-2018 increases affect young people who use drugs

PURPOSE

Drug overdose mortality remains a public health concern in many countries globally. In the US, overdoses involving synthetic opioids are the primary contributor to overdose mortality. We aimed to assess trends in overdose death due to synthetic opioids among young people and describe key demographic and temporal changes.

METHODS

Data from the US National Vital Statistics System Multiple Cause of Death files for 2009-2018 were analysed to determine age-specific overdose death rates by region (i.e. east versus west of the Mississippi River). Age-adjusted overdose mortality rates were used to compare demographic differences in all drug and synthetic opioid overdose among young people (aged 15-34 years) using a joinpoint regression with Poisson-approximated standard errors.

RESULTS

Driven by synthetic opioid overdose, the age burden of mortality shifted towards young people in eastern states and remained approximately constant in western states over the study period. The highest increases in drug overdose mortality rates were observed in young Black and Hispanic people and those living in large metropolitan areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid changes in the demographics of overdose demonstrate distinct but overlapping US overdose sub-epidemics, and highlight the need for targeted interventions to reduce overdose risk in young people.

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.

High willingness to use overdose prevention sites among female sex workers in Baltimore, Maryland

BACKGROUND

Overdose Prevention Sites (OPS) operate worldwide as spaces where people can consume previously purchased drugs under supervision, and are linked to reductions in HIV/HCV transmission and fatal overdoses. As the United States weighs their merits and legality, research is needed to estimate acceptability and use among populations at high risk for overdose. We examine willingness to use OPS among street-based female sex workers (FSW) with prevalent drug use and associated morbidities.

METHODS

We describe self-reported willingness, barriers and conditions around use of a hypothetical OPS among 141 FSW engaged in active drug use in Baltimore City, and describe trends using Pearson's χ2 and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

Most women had history of overdose (55 %) and were likely to use OPS (77 %). Willingness was higher among women who: were sexual minorities (97 %;P=0.002),experienced homelessness (82 %;P=0.019), injected drugs (82 %;P=0.013), shared syringes (82 %;P=0.007), experienced sexual violence (92 %;P=0.045) or reported heroin use (83 %;P=0.039) in the past 3 months. Common anticipated barriers included transportation (45 %) and fear of arrest (41 %).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights a population of uniquely high-risk women who would benefit from an OPS integrated with other services. Conditions and barriers discussed are informative for planning and implementation.

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.

High willingness to use drug consumption rooms among people who inject drugs in Scotland: findings from a national bio-behavioural survey among people who inject drugs

BACKGROUND

To address rising drug-related harms (including significant transmission of HIV) among people who inject drugs (PWID) in Glasgow, officials have proposed the introduction of the UK's first drug consumption room (DCR) in Glasgow city centre. Using a nationally representative sample, this study aimed to determine willingness to use a DCR among PWID nationally, in Glasgow city centre (the proposed DCR location), other Scottish city centres (excluding Glasgow) and the rest of Scotland (excluding city centres).

METHODS

Bio-behavioural survey, of 1469 current PWID (injected in last 6 months) across Scotland during 2017-18. Willingness to use DCRs was examined by drug-related risk behaviours and harms overall in Scotland, and then stratified by Glasgow city centre (n = 219), other Scottish city centres (n = 226) and the rest of Scotland (n = 1024).

RESULTS

The majority of PWID overall in Scotland (75%) were willing to use a DCR; willingness was higher among those recruited in Glasgow city centre (83%) and other Scottish city centres (83%), compared to the rest of Scotland (72%) (p < 0.001). Willingness was greater among PWID who reported (compared to those who did not report) injecting heroin (76%, p = 0.002), cocaine injecting (79%, p = 0.014), homelessness (86%, p < 0.001), public injecting (87%, p < 0.001) and an overdose (80%, p = 0.026). Willingness was found to be associated with a cumulative multiple risk variable: increased from 66% among those with a score of zero to 85% with a score of at least three (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of PWID at greatest risk of drug-related harm in Glasgow and elsewhere in Scotland would be willing to use a DCR, supporting proposals for the introduction of DCRs nationally.

Factors Associated With the Use of Supervised Consumption Facilities Among Women Who Inject Drugs in a Canadian Setting

BACKGROUND

Supervised consumption facilities (SCFs) are evidence-based harm reduction interventions that have been shown to reduce the risk of social and health-related harms associated with injection drug use. Previous qualitative studies have highlighted important motivations for SCF use among women who use drugs. However, factors associated with SCF use among women have not previously been evaluated.

METHODS

Data were obtained from 2 longitudinal community-recruited cohorts of people who use drugs in Vancouver, Canada between 2003 and 2017. Multivariable generalized estimating equations were used to calculate the odds of SCF use associated with social and structural risk factors for drug-related harm among women who reported injection drug use in the preceding 6-months.

RESULTS

A total of 795 participants were included in the study, contributing to 6302 interviews, with 602 participants (76%) reporting SCF use in at least one interview. Multivariable analysis demonstrated daily heroin and crystal methamphetamine injection (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 1.32 and 1.65, respectively), injecting in public (AOR = 1.77), binge injection (AOR = 1.22) and lack of housing (AOR = 1.74) to be associated with SCF use.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study demonstrates higher intensity patterns of drug use, including daily heroin and crystal methamphetamine injection, injecting in public and binge injection, as well as homelessness to be associated with SCF use among women. Future research should identify barriers to SCF use among women to minimize the risk of overdose and other drug-related harms.

Acceptability of safe drug consumption spaces among people who inject drugs in rural West Virginia

Aim

Safe consumption spaces (SCS) are indoor environments in which people can use drugs with trained personnel on site to provide overdose reversal and risk reduction services. SCS have been shown to reduce fatal overdoses, decrease public syringe disposal, and reduce public drug consumption. Existing SCS research in the USA has explored acceptability for the hypothetical use of SCS, but primarily among urban populations of people who inject drugs (PWID). Given the disproportionate impact of the opioid crisis in rural communities, this research examines hypothetical SCS acceptability among a rural sample of PWID in West Virginia.

Methods

Data were drawn from a 2018 cross-sectional survey of PWID (n = 373) who reported injection drug use in the previous 6 months and residence in Cabell County, West Virginia. Participants were asked about their hypothetical use of a SCS with responses dichotomized into two groups, likely and unlikely SCS users. Chi-square and t tests were conducted to identify differences between likely and unlikely SCS users across demographic, substance use, and health measures.

Results

Survey participants were 59.5% male, 83.4% non-Hispanic White, and 79.1% reported likely hypothetical SCS use. Hypothetical SCS users were significantly (p < .05) more likely to have recently (past 6 months) injected cocaine (38.3% vs. 25.7%), speedball (41.0% vs. 24.3%), and to report preferring drugs containing fentanyl (32.5% vs. 20.3%). Additionally, likely SCS users were significantly more likely to have recently experienced an overdose (46.8% vs. 32.4%), witnessed an overdose (78.3% vs. 60.8%), and received naloxone (51.2% vs. 37.8%). Likely SCS users were less likely to have borrowed a syringe from a friend (34.6% vs. 48.7%).

Conclusions

Rural PWID engaging in high-risk behaviors perceive SCS as an acceptable harm reduction strategy. SCS may be a viable option to reduce overdose fatalities in rural communities.

Willingness to Use Safe Consumption Spaces among Opioid Users at High Risk of Fentanyl Overdose in Baltimore, Providence, and Boston

Safe consumption spaces (SCS) are evidence-based interventions that reduce drug-related morbidity and mortality operating in many countries. However, SCS are yet to be widely implemented in the USA despite the escalating overdose epidemic. The aim of this multi-city study was to identify the factors associated with willingness to use a SCS among people who use drugs (PWUD) in Baltimore, Providence, and Boston, stratified by injection drug use status. Our secondary aim was to characterize the anticipated barriers to accessing SCS if they were to be implemented in these cities. PWUD were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey in 2017. The analysis was restricted to 326 opioid users (i.e., heroin, fentanyl, and non-medical opioid pill use). The majority (77%) of participants expressed willingness to use a SCS (Baltimore, 78%; Providence, 68%; Boston. 84%). Most respondents were male (59%), older than 35 years (76%), non-white (64%), relied on public/semi-public settings to inject (60%), had a history of overdose (64%), and recently suspected fentanyl contamination of their drugs (73%). A quarter (26%) preferred drugs containing fentanyl. Among injectors, female gender, racial minority status, suspicion of drugs containing fentanyl, and drug use in public/semi-public settings were associated with higher willingness to use a SCS; prior arrest was associated with lower willingness. Among non-injectors, racial minority status, preference for fentanyl, and drug use in public/semi-public settings were associated with higher willingness, whereas recent overdose held a negative association. The most commonly anticipated barriers to accessing a SCS in the future were concerns around arrest (38%), privacy (34%), confidentiality/trust/safety (25%), and cost/time/transportation (16%). These data provide evidence of high SCS acceptability among high-risk PWUD in the USA, including those who prefer street fentanyl. As SCS are implemented in the USA, targeted engagement efforts may be required to reach individuals exposed to the criminal justice system.

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.

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.

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.

Musculoskeletal Flexibility and Quality of Life: A Feasibility Study of Homeless Young Adults in Los Angeles County

Proper musculoskeletal health is dependent on the efficient inner workings of muscles, tendons, ligaments, joints, and bones. The homeless experience can be physically debilitating to these tissues and anatomical structures. This feasibility study aims to explore how to answer the overarching question: do the lived experiences of homeless young adults negatively affect their musculoskeletal health? Questionnaires were distributed to assess the demographic characteristics, physical activity, health behaviors, and sleep patterns of 40 homeless young adults and 45 university students in Los Angeles County. Participants also completed supervised stretch tests to assess musculoskeletal flexibility. Findings indicate that homeless young adults were less flexible in all four stretch assessments compared to university students. Noteworthy differences were noted with the sit and reach (p=0.050), butterfly (p=0.036), right shoulder (p=0.005), and left trunk twist tests (p=0.041). Analyses of physical activity levels and sleep location within the homeless subgroup suggest a deleterious impact on flexibility. Flexibility assessments are a low cost and sensitive method for measuring degree of musculoskeletal dysfunction of homeless young adults. Preliminary data suggests that the musculoskeletal health of this subgroup is adversely affected by their lived experience. Health services such as yoga or Pilates, in addition to existing case management and mental health services at homeless drop-in centers, may reduce the likelihood of long-term physical disability.

Perceptions about supervised injection facilities among people who inject drugs in Philadelphia

BACKGROUND

People who inject drugs (PWID) are at high risk for infectious diseases, skin and soft tissue infections, and overdose. However, these harms are all avoidable when sterile injection equipment, hygienic places to inject, and medical care are accessible. Unfortunately, many PWID in the U.S lack these resources. The most vulnerable are forced to inject in public spaces, where individual risks are high and communal harms are sometimes many. Supervised Injection Facilities (SIFs) are an established intervention for reducing these harms. Despite positive experiences in other countries, little research explores how PWID in the U.S. perceive the value of such facilities.

METHODS

We conducted a freelisting exercise with PWID (n=42) and healthcare providers (n=20) at a syringe exchange program (SEP) that provides comprehensive clinical and social services in Philadelphia to inform in-depth semi-structured interviews with PWID (n=19) at the same location.

RESULTS

Participants expressed support for a potential SIF as a valuable public health intervention. They suggested that an SIF would improve PWID health while reducing the public disorder associated with injecting drugs in public. The latter was especially important to participants without stable housing, whose decision to inject furtively in secluded places was often motivated by desire not to upset community members, and particularly children. These participants acknowledged that such seclusion elevated the risk of fatal overdose. Despite similarly positive perceptions about an SIF, participants with stable housing reported that they would prefer to continue injecting at home.

CONCLUSION

Results both confirm and extend prior research about PWID and SIFs. Participants expressed support for SIFs as in prior survey research in the U.S. and in other countries. Facility location and housing status were identified as important determinants of facility use. Results extend prior research by illuminating PWID perceptions in the U.S. including motivations grounded in concern for public order.

The willingness of people who inject drugs in Boston to use a supervised injection facility

BACKGROUND

In Massachusetts, the number of opioid-related deaths has increased 350% since 2000. In the setting of increasing overdose deaths, one potential intervention is supervised injection facilities (SIFs). This study explores willingness of people who inject drugs in Boston to use a SIF and examines factors associated with willingness.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of 237 people who inject drugs and utilize Boston's needle exchange program (NEP). The drop-in NEP provides myriad harm reduction services and referrals to addiction treatment. The survey was mostly self-administered (92%).

RESULTS

Results showed positive willingness to use a SIF was independently associated with use of heroin as main substance (odds ratio [OR]: 5.47; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9-15.4; P = .0004), public injection (OR: 5.09; 95% CI: 1.8-14.3; P = .002), history of seeking substance use disorder (SUD) treatment (OR: 4.99; 95% CI: 1.2-21.1; P = .05), having heard of SIF (OR: 4.80; 95% CI: 1.6-14.8; P = .004), Hispanic ethnicity (OR: 4.22; 95% CI: 0.9-18.8; P = .04), frequent NEP use (OR: 4.18; 95% CI: 1.2-14.7; P = .02), current desire for SUD treatment (OR: 4.15; 95% CI: 1.2-14.7; P = .03), hepatitis C diagnosis (OR: 3.68; 95% CI: 1.2-10.1; P = .02), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnosis (OR: 3.27; 95% CI: 1.3-8.4; P = .01), report of at least 1 chronic medical diagnosis (hepatitis C, human immunodeficiency virus [HIV], hypertension, or diabetes) (OR: 3.27; 95% CI: 1.2-8.9; P = .02), and comorbid medical and mental health diagnoses (OR: 2.93; 95% CI: 1.2-7.4; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Most respondents (91.4%) reported willingness to use a SIF. Respondents with substance use behavior reflecting high risk for overdose were significantly more likely to be willing to use a SIF. Respondents with behaviors that contribute to public health burden of injection drug use were also significantly more likely to be willing to use a SIF. Results indicate that this intervention would be well utilized by individuals who could most benefit from the model. As part of a broader public health approach, SIFs should be considered to reduce opioid overdose mortality, decrease public health burden of the opioid crisis, and promote access to addiction treatment and medical care.