The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people who inject drugs accessing harm reduction services in an rural American state

Assessing coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic impacts on the health of people who inject drugs using a novel data sharing model

OBJECTIVE

Using an innovative data sharing model, we assessed the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health of people who inject drugs (PWID).

DESIGN

The PWID Data Collaborative was established in 2021 to promote data sharing across PWID studies in North America. Contributing studies submitted aggregate data on 23 standardized indicators during four time periods: prepandemic (March 2019 to February 2020), early-pandemic (March 2020 to February 2021), mid-pandemic (March 2021 to February 2022), and late pandemic (March 2022 to February 2023).

METHODS

We present study-specific and meta-analyzed estimates for the percentage of PWID who took medications for opioid use disorder, received substance use treatment, shared syringes or injection equipment, had a mental health condition, had been incarcerated, or had experienced houselessness. To examine change over time across indicators, we fit a random effects meta-regression model to prevalence estimates using time as a moderator.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies contributed estimates to the Data Collaborative on these indicators, representing 6213 PWID interviews. We observed minimal change across prevalence of the six indicators between the prepandemic (March 2019 to February 2020) and three subsequent time periods, overall or within individual studies. Considerable heterogeneity was observed across study-specific and time-specific estimates.

CONCLUSION

Limited pandemic-related change observed in indicators of PWID health is likely a result of policy and supportive service-related changes and may also reflect resilience among service providers and PWID themselves. The Data Collaborative is an unprecedented data sharing model with potential to greatly improve the quality and timeliness of data on the health of PWID.

Perceptions of access to harm reduction services during the COVID-19 pandemic among people who inject drugs in metropolitan Chicago

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic amplified the risk environment for people who inject drugs (PWID), making continued access to harm reduction services imperative. Research has shown that some harm reduction service providers were able to continue to provide services throughout the pandemic. Most of these studies, however, focused on staff perspectives, not those of PWID. Our study examines changes in perceptions of access to harm reduction services (e.g., participant reported difficulty in accessing syringes and naloxone) among PWID participating in a longitudinal study conducted through the University of Illinois-Chicago's Community Outreach Intervention Projects field sites during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A COIVD-19 survey module was administered from March 2020-February 2022 to participants of an ongoing longitudinal study of PWID ages 18-30, who were English-speaking, and were residing in the Chicago Metropolitan Area. Responses to the COVID-19 survey module were analyzed to understand how study participants' self-reported access to harm reduction services changed throughout the pandemic. Baseline responses to the survey were analyzed to compare participant-reported drug use behaviors and perceived access to harm reduction services across COIVD-19 time periods. Mixed effects logistic regression was used to examine difficulty in syringe access as an outcome of COVID-19 time period.

RESULTS

Participants had significantly lower odds (AOR = 0.28; 95% CI 0.12-0.65) of reporting difficulty in accessing syringes later in the pandemic. However, the majority of participants reported access to syringes and naloxone remained the same as before the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of perceived changes in harm reduction access by PWID and the decrease in those reporting difficulty accessing syringes as the pandemic progressed suggests the efficacy of adaptations to harm reduction service provision (e.g., window and mobile service) during the pandemic. Further research is needed to understand how the COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted PWIDs' engagement with harm reduction services.

Impact of pandemic-induced service disruptions and behavioral changes on HCV and HIV transmission amongst people who inject drugs: a modeling study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic may have disproportionally impacted vulnerable groups such as people who inject drugs (PWID) through reduced healthcare services as well as social changes from pandemic mitigation measures. Understanding how the COVID-19 pandemic and associated mitigation strategies subsequently changed the trajectory of hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HIV transmission is critical to estimating disease burdens, identifying outbreak risk, and developing informed intervention strategies.

METHODS

Using behavioral data from the AIDS Linked to the IntraVenous Experience (ALIVE) study, an ongoing community-based cohort of PWID in Baltimore, USA, and an individual-based network model, we explored the impacts of service disruptions combined with changes in social networks and injecting behaviors of PWID on HCV and HIV transmission.

RESULTS

Analyses of ALIVE data showed that during the pandemic, there was an acceleration in injection cessation trajectories overall, but those who continued injecting increased the frequency of injection; at the same time, individual drug-use networks became smaller and the probability of injecting with others decreased. Simulation results demonstrated that HCV and HIV prevalence increased from service disruptions alone, but these effects were mitigated when including observed behavior changes in addition.

CONCLUSIONS

Model results combined with rich individual behavioral data indicated that pandemic-induced behavioral changes of PWID that lasted longer than service disruptions could have offset the increasing disease burden caused by disrupted service access during the pandemic.

Perceptions of overdose response hotlines and applications among rural and remote individuals who use drugs in Canada: a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

The overdose epidemic continues to be one of the largest public health crises in Canada. Various harm reduction supports have been implemented to curb this epidemic; however, they remain concentrated within urban settings. To address this limitation, overdose response hotlines and applications (ORHA) are novel, technologybased harm reduction services that may reduce drug-related mortality for people who use substances (PWUS) living in rural communities through virtual supervised consumption. These services enable more timely and remote activation of emergency responses, should an individual become unresponsive. We aimed to explore the experiences, perceptions and attitudes surrounding ORHA of individuals living in rural areas.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 15 PWUS (7 [46.7%] male, 9 [60%] Indigenous) who lived in rural, remote or Indigenous communities. Interviews were conducted until data saturation was reached. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Six key themes emerged: (1) participants viewed ORHA as a pragmatic intervention for rural areas but noted potential limitations to its uptake and effectiveness; (2) rural geography may hinder EMS response times, reducing the efficacy of ORHA; (3) ORHA uptake may be limited due to significant stigma faced by PWUS in these communities; (4) lack of access to technology remains a barrier to ORHA access; (5) harm reduction awareness is often limited in rural communities; and (6) there are unique social implications around substance use and harm reduction for rural Indigenous PWUS.

CONCLUSION

While participants believed that ORHA may be a feasible harm reduction strategy for rural PWUS, limitations, including response times, technological access and substance use stigma, remain.

Structural and social changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic and their impact on engagement in substance use disorder treatment services: a qualitative study among people with a recent history of injection drug use in Baltimore, Maryland

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorder treatment and recovery support services are critical for achieving and maintaining recovery. There are limited data on how structural and social changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic impacted individual-level experiences with substance use disorder treatment-related services among community-based samples of people who inject drugs.

METHODS

People with a recent history of injection drug use who were enrolled in the community-based AIDS Linked to the IntraVenous Experience study in Baltimore, Maryland participated in a one-time, semi-structured interview between July 2021 and February 2022 about their experiences living through the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 28). An iterative inductive coding process was used to identify themes describing how structural and social changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic affected participants' experiences with substance use disorder treatment-related services.

RESULTS

The median age of participants was 54 years (range = 24-73); 10 (36%) participants were female, 16 (57%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 8 (29%) were living with HIV. We identified several structural and social changes due the pandemic that acted as barriers and facilitators to individual-level engagement in treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and recovery support services (e.g., support group meetings). New take-home methadone flexibility policies temporarily facilitated engagement in MOUD treatment, but other pre-existing rigid policies and practices (e.g., zero-tolerance) were counteracting barriers. Changes in the illicit drug market were both a facilitator and barrier to MOUD treatment. Decreased availability and pandemic-related adaptations to in-person services were a barrier to recovery support services. While telehealth expansion facilitated engagement in recovery support group meetings for some participants, other participants faced digital and technological barriers. These changes in service provision also led to diminished perceived quality of both virtual and in-person recovery support group meetings. However, a facilitator of recovery support was increased accessibility of individual service providers (e.g., counselors and Sponsors).

CONCLUSIONS

Structural and social changes across several socioecological levels created new barriers and facilitators of individual-level engagement in substance use disorder treatment-related services. Multilevel interventions are needed to improve access to and engagement in high-quality substance use disorder treatment and recovery support services among people who inject drugs.

Understanding and learning from rural drug service adaptations to opioid substitution therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic: the What C-OST? study

Introduction

In April 2020, in response to government COVID-19 advice, changes were made to the way English drug services operated. Methadone and buprenorphine were typically dispensed in 1- to 2-week supplies, and key working was conducted by phone/online. Previous studies have examined the impact of these changes on people from urban settings. This study adds the experiences and perspectives of people receiving care from drug services in rural areas and makes suggestions for future emergency planning.

Methods

Telephone semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 people receiving care in Somerset, Wiltshire, and Suffolk, rural counties in England. Reflexive thematic analysis was used.

Results

Three overarching themes were found. "Challenges of rural lockdown" (theme 1) describes how rural community challenges, especially reduced or no rural public transport, were experienced. This hampered some OST collections, with consequential drug use. It also impeded connections to loved ones, worsening isolation. For participants who were struggling pre-pandemic, the intersection between this and their experience of revised drug service operations is embodied in "Amplification of Social Disconnection: Cut off and unheard" (theme 2). They felt a lack of support, particularly from remote provision key working. Participants who had supportive relationships and time in the pandemic occupied in ways they found meaningful, and others who struggled with anxiety or depression, found pandemic changes "Fits better with my life" (theme 3). They experienced more freedom for other things, gained support by other means, such as family, or felt more comfortable with remote engagement. A cross-cutting sub-theme "Understandable Interruptions" showed acceptance of pandemic disruptions.

Conclusion

National guidance and organizational policy impacted participants in different ways. Those who had supportive relationships and occupied time were better able to make positive use of newfound freedoms and engage with community-level support. In contrast, those who had less stability, including mental health struggles and social isolation, felt cut off and unheard, particularly from key workers. Reduced rural transport was a significant community-level issue, which impeded OST collection and social support. We suggest emergency response plans be created for individuals taking account of their pre-existing personal situations.

Morbidity and mortality of Serratia marcescens bacteraemia during the substance use epidemic

BACKGROUND

Serratia marcescens (S. marcescens) is an Enterobacterales species present throughout the environment and causes a range of infections. Historically, S. marcescens has been associated with persons who inject drugs (PWID), but literature is scarce. This study aimed to compare treatment characteristics and clinical outcomes between PWID and non-PWID with Serratia marcescens bacteraemia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalised with S. marcescens bacteraemia from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2019 at a tertiary medical centre. Patients were included if they were aged ≥ 18 years and had at least one positive blood culture for S. marcescens.

RESULTS

Of the 67 patients who met inclusion criteria, 14 were identified as PWID (21%) and 53 were non-PWID (79%). Persons who inject drugs were younger (median age: PWID 32 years, non-PWID 67 years) and less likely to have renal disease (PWID 7%, non-PWID 34%). Persons who inject drugs had a higher incidence of infective endocarditis (IE) (PWID 48%, non-PWID 0%) and were more likely to receive combination antimicrobial therapy (PWID 29%, non-PWID 2%). All-cause mortality at 12 months was comparable between groups (PWID 21%, non-PWID 21%).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that long-term outcomes of PWID are comparable with non-PWID, despite PWID being a younger cohort with fewer comorbidities. Clinicians should have high suspicion of IE in PWID with S. marcescens bacteraemia.

Challenges of implementing safer supply programs in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Canada is experiencing an unprecedented drug toxicity crisis driven by a highly toxic unregulated drug supply contaminated with fentanyl, benzodiazepine, and other drugs. Safer supply pilot programs provide prescribed doses of pharmaceutical alternatives to individuals accessing the unregulated drug supply and have been implemented to prevent overdose and reduce related harms. Given the recent emergence of these pilot programs and the paucity of data on implementation challenges, we sought to document challenges in their initial implementation phase.

METHODS

We obtained organizational progress reports from Health Canada, submitted between 2020 and 2022 by 11 pilot programs located in British Columbia, Ontario, and New Brunswick. We analyzed the data using deductive and inductive approaches via thematic analysis. Analyses were informed by the consolidated framework for implementation research.

RESULTS

We obtained 45 progress reports from 11 pilot programs. Six centres were based in British Columbia, four in Ontario, and one in New Brunswick. Four overarching themes were identified regarding the challenges faced during the establishment and implementation of pilot programs: i) Organizational features (e.g., physical space constraints, staff shortages); ii) Outer contexts (e.g., limited operational funds and resources, structural inequities to access, public perceptions); iii) Intervention characteristics (e.g., clients' unmet medication needs); and iv) Implementation process (e.g., pandemic-related challenges, overly medicalized and high-barrier safer supply models).

CONCLUSIONS

Safer supply pilot programs in Canada face multiple inner and outer implementation challenges. Given the potential role of safer supply programs in addressing the drug toxicity crisis in Canada and the possibility of future scale-up, services should be well-supported during their implementation phases. Refining service provision within safer supply programs based on the feedback and experiences of clients and program administrators is warranted, along with efforts to ensure that appropriate medications are available to meet the clients' needs.

Changes in buprenorphine visits in frontier and remote locations: Effects of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Background

The pandemic has changed many aspects of healthcare, including the treatment of people with opioid use disorder with buprenorphine. Prior to the pandemic, rural health disparities existed in the accessibility of this treatment. Rural and frontier areas of the United States, particularly the Great Plains, had few or no providers of this evidence-based treatment. This study aimed to investigate how access to buprenorphine changed in the Great Plains during the pandemic.

Methods

This retrospective observational study compared the number of weekly patient appointments resulting in a buprenorphine prescription for 55 weeks before the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and 55 weeks after. Electronic health records of the largest rural health provider in the Great Plains were queried. Patients were categorized as coming from a frontier location or a non-frontier location based on the home address provided at the visit. The USDA defines frontier as communities that are small and distant from urban centers. Time series analysis was utilized to understand changes in weekly visits during this period.

Results

A significant increase in weekly buprenorphine visits occurred after the pandemic's start. Further, females and people from frontier locations had significantly higher numbers of buprenorphine visits.

Conclusions

In an area of the country with low pre-existing access to buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder, increases in buprenorphine visits were found after the pandemic began. This was particularly true of females who reside in frontier areas. Pandemic-related changes may have reduced barriers to this critical treatment, especially among rural populations.

A Scoping Review on the Effects of COVID-19 on Syringe Service Programs in the United States

The COVID-19 pandemic has had worldwide impacts, including disrupting community services. One interrupted service was syringe service programs (SSPs), community-established initiatives that provide sterile supplies and aid in overcoming addiction in drug-using participants. In the United States (U.S.), SSPs have been key in combating the recent opioid use crisis and associated infections such as the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C. While some published reports on the pandemic's overall impacts on SSPs exist, certain aspects such as operational changes and repercussions on staff and participants may still be lacking. Information about the impact of interrupted SSP services due to the pandemic may provide insight into how to prepare to mitigate similar outcomes during possible future health outbreaks. The aim of this scoping review was thus to explore the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the operations, staff, and participants of SSPs in the U.S. The initial search of the databases PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science with selected keywords yielded 117 articles published in English between January 1, 2020, and August 31, 2022. After screening each article for study eligibility, 11 articles were included in the final review. Of the seven articles exploring SSP operational impacts from the pandemic, five acknowledged that mitigation strategies influenced functions, seven highlighted supply changes, and four emphasized the resulting staffing changes. Four studies inspected the pandemic's impacts on SSP participants, which included two articles highlighting participants' struggles with isolation and loneliness, one referencing the fear of exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and two examining the overall negative psychological effects experienced during this time. SSPs in various settings and regions across the U.S. experienced changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of these modifications negatively impacted operations, staffing, and participant relationships. Examining the issues that individual SSPs encountered highlights opportunities for structured solutions for the present and in the case of future infectious disease outbreaks. With the severity of the opioid use crisis in the U.S. and the dependence on SSPs for its mitigation, future work in this space should be prioritized.

'I feel like they're actually listening to me': a pilot study of a hospital discharge decision-making conversation guide for patients with injection drug use-associated infections

Background

The prevalence of injection drug use (IDU)-associated infections and associated hospitalizations has been increasing for nearly two decades. Due to issues ranging from ongoing substance use to peripherally inserted central catheter safety, many clinicians find discharge decision-making challenging. Typically, clinicians advise patients to remain hospitalized for several weeks for intravenous antimicrobial treatment; however, some patients may desire other antimicrobial treatment options. A structured conversation guide, delivered by infectious disease physicians, intended to inform hospital discharge decisions has the potential to enhance patient participation in decisions. We developed a conversation guide in order to: (1) investigate its feasibility and acceptability and (2) examine experiences, outcomes, and lessons learned from use of the guide.

Methods

We interviewed physicians after they each piloted the conversation guide with two patients. We interviewed patients immediately after the conversation and again 4-6 weeks later. Two analysts indexed transcriptions and used the framework method to identify and organize relevant information. We conducted retrospective chart review to corroborate and contextualize qualitative data.

Results

Eight patients and four infectious disease physicians piloted the conversation guide. All patients (N = 8) completed antimicrobial treatment. Nearly all participants believed the conversation guide was important for incorporating patient values and preferences. Patients reported an increased sense of autonomy, but felt post-discharge needs could be better addressed. Physician participants identified the guide's long length and inclusion of pain management as areas for improvement.

Conclusions

A novel conversation guide to inform hospital discharge decision-making for patients with IDU-associated infections was feasible, acceptable, and fostered the incorporation of patient preferences and values into decisions. While we identified areas for improvement, overall participants believed that this novel conversation guide helped to improve patient care and autonomy.