Moving towards a continuum of safer supply options for people who use drugs: A qualitative study exploring national perspectives on safer supply among professional stakeholders in Canada

Overdose prevention centres as spaces of safety, trust and inclusion: A causal pathway based on a realist review

ISSUES

Overdose prevention centres (OPC) are non-residential spaces where people can use illicit drugs (that they have obtained elsewhere) in the presence of staff who can intervene to prevent and manage any overdoses that occur. Many reviews of OPCs exist but they do not explain how OPCs work.

APPROACH

We carried out a realist review, using the RAMESES reporting standards. We systematically searched for and then thematically analysed 391 documents that provide information on the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of OPCs.

KEY FINDINGS

Our retroductive analysis identified a causal pathway that highlights the feeling of safety - and the immediate outcome of not dying - as conditions of possibility for the people who use OPCs to build trust and experience social inclusion. The combination of safety, trust and social inclusion that is triggered by OPCs can - depending on the contexts in which they operate - generate other positive outcomes, which may include less risky drug use practices, reductions in blood borne viruses and injection-related infections and wounds, and access to housing. These outcomes are contingent on relevant contexts, including political and legal environments, which differ for women and people from racialised minorities.

CONCLUSIONS

OPCs can enable people who live with structural violence and vulnerability to develop feelings of safety and trust that help them stay alive and to build longer term trajectories of social inclusion, with potential to improve other aspects of their health and living conditions.

A qualitative evaluation of a fentanyl patch safer supply program in Vancouver, Canada

BACKGROUND

The ongoing overdose crisis in Canada has prompted efforts to increase access to a "safer supply" of prescribed alternatives to the unregulated drug supply. While safer supply programs predominantly distribute hydromorphone tablets, the Safer Alternatives for Emergency Response (SAFER) program in Vancouver, Canada offers a range of prescribed alternatives, including fentanyl patches. However, little is known about the effectiveness of fentanyl patches as safer supply. Drawing on the perspectives and experiences of program participants, we sought to qualitatively evaluate the effectiveness of the SAFER fentanyl patch program in meeting its intended aims, including reducing risk of overdose by decreasing reliance on the unregulated drug supply.

METHODS

As part of a larger mixed-methods evaluation of SAFER, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 17 fentanyl patch program participants between February 2022 and April 2023. Thematic analysis of interview data focused on program engagement, experiences, impacts, and challenges.

RESULTS

The flexible program structure, including lack of need for daily dispensation, the extended missed dose protocol, and community pharmacy patch distribution fostered engagement and enhanced autonomy. Improved management of withdrawal symptoms and cravings due to steady transdermal dosing led to reduced unregulated drug use and overdose risk. Participants also experienced economic benefits and improvements in overall health and quality of life. However, skin irritation and patch adhesion issues were key barriers to program retention.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate the value of including fentanyl patch safer supply in the substance use continuum of care and offer insights for innovations in delivery of this intervention.

Trends in toxicological findings in unintentional opioid or stimulant toxicity deaths in Québec, Canada, 2012-2021: Has Québec entered a new era of drug-related deaths?

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to describe rates and toxicological findings of unintentional opioid and stimulant toxicity deaths, 2012-2021.

METHODS

The dataset included accidental deaths determined by the Coroner to be due to opioids or stimulants. We calculated annual crude mortality rates and described combinations of drugs identified in toxicological examinations of these deaths. We described temporal trends in the detection of specific opioids, stimulants, benzodiazepines (including novel benzodiazepines), gabapentinoids and z-drugs in deaths due to opioids and stimulants.

RESULTS

Mortality rates increased over time, reaching their peak in 2020 and remaining high in 2021. In deaths due to opioids, there was a decline in the proportion of deaths involving pharmaceutical opioids after 2019, and a corresponding increase in the proportion of deaths with fentanyl detected. Benzodiazepines were often present in deaths due to opioids, with novel benzodiazepines increasing rapidly from 2019 onwards. Cocaine was the most frequently detected drug in deaths due to stimulants, but amphetamine/methamphetamine was detected in around half of all stimulant deaths from 2016 onwards.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Despite availability of a multitude of overdose prevention interventions, mortality rates due to drug toxicity have increased in Québec. Toxicological findings of these deaths suggest concerning shifts in the illicit drug market, with Québec potentially having entered a new era of elevated overdose mortality. Intervention scale-up is essential, but unlikely to be sufficient, to reduce drug-related mortality. Policy reform to address the root causes of drug toxicity deaths, including an unpredictable drug supply, strained health systems and socio-economic precarity, is essential.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Simulated impact of medicaid expansion on the economic burden of opioid use disorder in North Carolina

BACKGROUND

Opioid use disorder (OUD) imposes significant costs on state and local governments. Medicaid expansion may lead to a reduction in the cost burden of OUD to the state.

METHODS

We estimated the health care, criminal justice and child welfare costs, and tax revenue losses, attributable to OUD and borne by the state of North Carolina in 2022, and then estimated changes in the same domains following Medicaid expansion in North Carolina (adopted in December 2023). Analyses used existing literature on the national and state-level costs attributable to OUD to estimate individual-level health care, criminal justice, and child welfare system costs, and lost tax revenues. We combined Individual-level costs and prevalence estimates to estimate costs borne by the state before Medicaid expansion. Changes in costs after expansion were computed based on a) medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) access for new enrollees and b) shifting of responsibility for some health care costs from the state to the federal government. Monte Carlo simulation accounted for the impact of parameter uncertainty. Dollar estimates are from the 2022 price year, and costs following the first year were discounted at 3 %.

RESULTS

In 2022, North Carolina incurred costs of $749 million (95 % credible interval [CI]: $305 M-$1,526 M) associated with OUD (53 % in health care, 36 % in criminal justice, 7 % in lost tax revenue, and 4 % in child welfare costs). Expanding Medicaid lowered the cost burden of OUD incurred by the state. The state was predicted to save an estimated $72 million per year (95 % CI: $6 M-$241 M) for the first two years and $30 million per year (95 % CI: -$28 M-$176 M) in subsequent years. Over five years, savings totaled $224 million (95 % CI: -$47 M-$949 M).

CONCLUSION

Medicaid expansion has the potential to decrease the burden of OUD in North Carolina, and policymakers should expedite its implementation.

Acceptability and anticipated effectiveness of a safe supply of opioids, among people who inject opioids in King County, WA

BACKGROUND

Opioid overdose mortality in the US has exceeded one million deaths over the last two decades. A regulated opioid supply may help prevent future overdose deaths by reducing exposure to the unregulated opioid supply. We examined the acceptability, delivery model preference, and anticipated effectiveness of different regulated opioid models among people in the Seattle area who inject opioids.

METHODS

We enrolled people who inject drugs in the 2022 Seattle-area National HIV Behavior Surveillance (NHBS) survey. Participants were recruited between July and December 2022 using respondent-driven sampling. Participants who reported injecting opioids (N = 453) were asked whether regulated opioids would be acceptable, their preferred model of receiving regulated opioids, and the anticipated change in individual overdose risk from accessing a regulated opioid supply.

RESULTS

In total, 369 (81 %) participants who injected opioids reported that a regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to them. Of the 369 who found a regulated opioid supply to be acceptable, the plurality preferred a take-home model where drugs are prescribed (35 %), followed closely by a dispensary model that required no prescription (28 %), and a prescribed model where drugs need to be consumed on site (13 %), a model where no prescription is required and drugs can be accessed in a community setting with a one-time upfront payment was the least preferred model (5 %). Most participants (69 %) indicated that receiving a regulated opioid supply would be "a lot less risky" than their current supply, 20 % said, "a little less risky", 10 % said no difference, and 1 % said a little or a lot more risky.

CONCLUSION

A regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to most participants, and participants reported it would greatly reduce their risk of overdose. As overdose deaths continue to increase in Washington state pragmatic and effective solutions that reduce exposure to unregulated drugs are needed.

Bridging the Gap in Harm Reduction Using Mobile Overdose Response Services (MORS) in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced additional health challenges for people who use substances (PWUS) amid the overdose crisis. Numerous harm reduction services, including supervised consumption sites (SCS) across Canada, faced shutdowns and reduced operating capacity in order to comply with public health measures. Mobile Overdose Response Services (MORS) are novel overdose prevention technologies that allow those who are unable to access alternative means of harm reduction to consume substances under the virtual supervision of a trained operator. Here, we examine the role of MORS in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 59 semi-structured interviews were conducted with the following key interest groups: PWUS, healthcare providers, harm reduction workers, MORS operators, and the general public. Inductive thematic analysis informed by grounded theory was used to identify major themes pertaining to the perception of MORS. As the pandemic shifted the public focus away from harm reduction, many participants viewed MORS as an acceptable strategy to reduce the harms associated with solitary substance and alleviate the sense of isolation driven by social distancing measures. While the pandemic may have increased the utility of MORS, concerns surrounding personal privacy and confidentiality remained. Overall, MORS were perceived as a useful adjunct service to address the unmet needs PWUS during the pandemic and beyond.

Prescribed safer supply during dual public health emergencies: a qualitative study examining service providers perspectives on early implementation

BACKGROUND

Within North America and worldwide, drug related overdoses have increased dramatically over the past decade. COVID-19 escalated the need for a safer supply to replace unregulated substances and to reduce toxicity and overdoses. Service providers play an integral role in the delivery of safer supply but there is little empirical evidence that conceptualizes effective safer supply from their perspectives. This study explored early implementation and impacts of a safer supply program, capturing the perspectives of an interdisciplinary team of service providers on tensions and issues encountered in the development of the SAFER program.

METHODS

Using a community-based participatory approach, we conducted individual interviews with program providers (n = 9). The research team was composed of researchers from a local drug user organization, a local harm reduction organization, and academic researchers. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) informed the interview guide. Data was analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

There are six themes describing early implementation: (1) risk mitigation prescribing as context for early implementation; (2) developing SAFER specific clinical protocols; (3) accessibility challenges and program innovations; (4) interdisciplinary team and wraparound care; (5) program tensions between addiction medicine and harm reduction; (6) the successes of safer supply and future visions.

CONCLUSION

Early implementation issues and tensions included prescriber concerns about safer supply prescribing in a highly politicized environment, accessibility challenges for service users such as stigma, encampment displacement, OAT requirements, program capacity and costs, and tensions between addiction medicine and harm reduction. Navigating these tensions included development of clinical protocols, innovations to reduce accessibility challenges such as outreach, wraparound care, program coverage of medication costs and prescribing safer supply with/without OAT. These findings contribute important insights for the development of prescribed safer supply programs.

People who use drugs' prioritization of regulation amid decriminalization reforms in British Columbia, Canada: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

North America and the province of British Columbia (BC), Canada, is experiencing an unprecedented number of overdose deaths. In BC, overdose has become the leading cause of death for people between the ages of 10-59 years old. In January 2023, BC decriminalized personal possession of a number of illegal substances with one aim being to address overdose deaths through stigma reduction and promoting access to substance use services.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study to understand people who use drugs' (PWUD) perceptions of the new decriminalization policy, immediately prior to its' implementation (October-December 2022). To contextualize decriminalization within broader drug policy, we also asked PWUD what they perceived as the priority issues drug policy ought to address and the necessary solutions. Our final sample included 38 participants who used illegal drugs in the past month.

RESULTS

We identified four themes: 1) The illicit drug supply as the main driver of drug toxicity deaths 2) Concerns about the impact of decriminalization on drug toxicity deaths 3) Views towards decriminalization as a policy response in the context of the drug toxicity crisis 4) Regulation as a symbol of hope for reducing drug toxicity deaths.

CONCLUSION

From our data it became clear that many anticipated that decriminalization would have minimal or no impact on the overdose crisis. Regulation was perceived as the necessary policy approach for effectively and candidly addressing the drivers of the ongoing overdose crisis. These findings are important as jurisdictions consider different approaches to moving away from prohibition-based drug policy.

Prescribed safer opioid supply: A scoping review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Safer opioid supply programs provide prescription pharmaceutical opioids, often with supportive services, to people at high risk of experiencing harms related to substance use. However, questions regarding the effectiveness and safety of this practice remain. We conducted a scoping review of literature describing client outcomes from formal opioid supply programs providing prescriptions for pharmaceutical opioids, and the perceptions of involved clients/providers.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review of peer-reviewed studies and grey literature published between January 1, 2012, to September 12, 2023. We included articles reporting either safer opioid supply client outcomes or clients/providers perspectives. Extracted data included study objectives, substance use patterns, client outcomes, client/provider perspectives, and estimates of effectiveness and/or harm.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 1,597 articles. Following removal of duplicates and application of exclusion criteria, 24 publications comprising 17 peer-reviewed and seven grey literature publications were included in our study. We generated eight themes summarizing topics in the available literature: opioid-related toxicities, infectious complications, other clinical outcomes, client-reported outcomes, program access barriers, diversion, program retention, and costs to the healthcare system. Specific findings included low rates of opioid toxicities, improved physical and mental health, and improved quality of life among clients. A lack of access to adequate opioid doses and the limited range of opioid options offered within safer opioid supply programs was described by clients and providers as a potential reason for diversion and a barrier to program access.

CONCLUSIONS

Generally, evidence suggests that safer opioid supply programs are beneficial to clients through measurable outcomes. However, the available literature has important limitations, including limited inferences about the effectiveness, safety, and potential for diversion within safer opioid supply programs. Further research is needed to support the ongoing evaluation of safer opioid supply programs as one component of a multifactorial response to escalating rates of substance-related harms.

British Columbia's Safer Opioid Supply Policy and Opioid Outcomes

Importance

In March 2020, British Columbia, Canada, became the first jurisdiction globally to launch a large-scale provincewide safer supply policy. The policy allowed individuals with opioid use disorder at high risk of overdose or poisoning to receive pharmaceutical-grade opioids prescribed by a physician or nurse practitioner, but to date, opioid-related outcomes after policy implementation have not been explored.

Objective

To investigate the association of British Columbia's Safer Opioid Supply policy with opioid prescribing and opioid-related health outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used quarterly province-level data from quarter 1 of 2016 (January 1, 2016) to quarter 1 of 2022 (March 31, 2022), from British Columbia, where the Safer Opioid Supply policy was implemented, and Manitoba and Saskatchewan, where the policy was not implemented (comparison provinces).

Exposure

Safer Opioid Supply policy implemented in British Columbia in March 2020.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were rates of prescriptions, claimants, and prescribers of opioids targeted by the Safer Opioid Supply policy (hydromorphone, morphine, oxycodone, and fentanyl); opioid-related poisoning hospitalizations; and deaths from apparent opioid toxicity. Difference-in-differences analysis was used to compare changes in outcomes before and after policy implementation in British Columbia with those in the comparison provinces.

Results

The Safer Opioid Supply policy was associated with statistically significant increases in rates of opioid prescriptions (2619.6 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, 1322.1-3917.0 per 100 000 population; P < .001) and claimants (176.4 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, 33.5-319.4 per 100 000 population; P = .02). There was no significant change in prescribers (15.7 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, -0.2 to 31.6 per 100 000 population; P = .053). However, the opioid-related poisoning hospitalization rate increased by 3.2 per 100 000 population (95% CI, 0.9-5.6 per 100 000 population; P = .01) after policy implementation. There were no statistically significant changes in deaths from apparent opioid toxicity (1.6 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, -1.3 to 4.5 per 100 000 population; P = .26).

Conclusions and Relevance

Two years after its launch, the Safer Opioid Supply policy in British Columbia was associated with higher rates of safer supply opioid prescribing but also with a significant increase in opioid-related poisoning hospitalizations. These findings will help inform ongoing debates about this policy not only in British Columbia but also in other jurisdictions that are contemplating it.

Understanding the barriers and facilitators to implementing and sustaining Mobile Overdose Response Services from the perspective of Canadian key interest groups: a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Unregulated supply of fentanyl and adulterants continues to drive the overdose crisis. Mobile Overdose Response Services (MORS) are novel technologies that offer virtual supervised consumption to minimize the risk of fatal overdose for those who are unable to access other forms of harm reduction. However, as newly implemented services, they are also faced with numerous limitations. The aim of this study was to examine the facilitators and barriers to the adoption of MORS in Canada.

METHODS

A total of 64 semi-structured interviews were conducted between November 2021 and April 2022. Participants consisted of people who use substances (PWUS), family members of PWUS, health care professionals, harm reduction workers, MORS operators, and members of the general public. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify the major themes and subthemes.

RESULTS

Respondents revealed that MORS facilitated a safe, anonymous, and nonjudgmental environment for PWUS to seek harm reduction and other necessary support. It also created a new sense of purpose for operators to positively contribute to the community. Further advertising and promotional efforts were deemed important to increase its awareness. However, barriers to MORS implementation included concerns regarding privacy/confidentiality, uncertainty of funding, and compassion fatigue among the operators.

CONCLUSION

Although MORS were generally viewed as a useful addition to the currently existing harm reduction services, it's important to monitor and tackle these barriers by engaging the perspectives of key interest groups.

Substance use care innovations during COVID-19: barriers and facilitators to the provision of safer supply at a toronto COVID-19 isolation and recovery site

BACKGROUND

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an urgent need to establish isolation spaces for people experiencing homelessness who were exposed to or had COVID-19. In response, community agencies and the City of Toronto opened COVID-19 isolation and recovery sites (CIRS) in March 2020. We sought to examine the provision of comprehensive substance use services offered to clients on-site to facilitate isolation, particularly the uptake of safer supply prescribing (prescription of pharmaceutical opioids and/or stimulants) as part of a spectrum of comprehensive harm reduction and addiction treatment interventions.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 25 clients and 25 staff (including peer, harm reduction, nursing and medical team members) from the CIRS in April-July 2021. Iterative and thematic analytic methods were used to identify key themes that emerged in the interview discussions.

RESULTS

At the time of implementation of the CIRS, the provision of a safer supply of opioids and stimulants was a novel and somewhat controversial practice. Prescribed safer supply was integrated to address the high risk of overdose among clients needing to isolate due to COVID-19. The impact of responding to on-site overdoses and presence of harm reduction and peer teams helped clinical staff overcome hesitation to prescribing safer supply. Site-specific clinical guidance and substance use specialist consults were crucial tools in building capacity to provide safer supply. Staff members had varied perspectives on what constitutes 'evidence-based' practice in a rapidly changing, crisis situation.

CONCLUSION

The urgency involved in intervening during a crisis enabled the adoption of prescribed safer supply, meeting the needs of people who use substances and assisting them to complete isolation periods, while also expanding what constitutes acceptable goals in the care of people who use drugs to include harm reduction approaches.

Preferred stimulant safer supply and associations with methamphetamine preference among people who use stimulants in British Columbia: Findings from a 2021 cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

As safer supply programs expand in Canada, stimulant safer supply is often overlooked despite the harms and criminalization faced by people who use stimulants.

METHODS

The 2021 Harm Reduction Client Survey was administered at 17 harm reduction sites around British Columbia, Canada. The survey included a question about what specific substance participants would want to receive as stimulant safer supply. We investigated preference of stimulant safer substance by looking at frequency of stated preference and by using multivariable logistic regression to understand factors associated with the most frequently chosen substance.

RESULTS

Of 330 participants who reported a stimulant safer supply preference, 58.5% (n = 193) chose crystal methamphetamine, 13% (n = 43) crack cocaine and 12.4% (n = 41) cocaine powder. The options that were available by prescription at the time of data collection were chosen by under 11% of participants (dextroamphetamine n = 21, methylphenidate n = 15). A preference for crystal methamphetamine was associated with being 29 and under compared to 50 and over (AOR: 3.96, 95% CI: 1.42-11.07, p-value: 0.01); self-identifying as a cis man versus a cis woman (AOR: 1.75, 95% CI: 1.03-2.97, p-value: 0.04); and using drugs every day (AOR: 15.43, 95% CI: 3.38-70.51, p-value: < 0.01) or a few times a week (AOR: 8.90, 95% CI: 1.78-44.44, p-value: 0.01) compared to a few times a month.

CONCLUSIONS

Preference of stimulant safer supply is associated with age, gender, and substance use characteristics. Safer supply programs that offer limited substances risk being poorly accessed, resulting in a continued reliance on an unregulated supply. Moreover, programs that do not offer a range of substances can contribute to health inequities.

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.

Community partner perspectives on the implementation of a novel safer supply program in Canada: a qualitative study of the MySafe Project

BACKGROUND

The adulteration of the illicit drug supply with fentanyl and its analogues is driving the ongoing overdose crisis in North America. While various harm reduction interventions address overdose-related risks, there is growing interest in safer supply programs, including the MySafe Project which utilizes a biometric dispensing machine that provides pharmaceutical opioid alternatives to the toxic drug supply. However, the experiences and perspectives of professional community partners on program implementation remain unexplored. This study aims to examine professional community partner perspectives on the feasibility, as well as barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the MySafe program.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 17 professional community partners involved in program implementation across four pilot locations in Canada. Thematic analysis of interviews focused on perspectives on safer supply, barriers and facilitators faced during program implementation, and recommendations to inform future scale-up of low-barrier safer supply models across Canada.

RESULTS

Participants identified a variety of barriers, including the dependence on clinician buy-in, coupled with regulatory and logistical constraints. In addition, some participants perceived hydromorphone to be an inadequate substitute to the increasingly toxic street opioid supply. Lastly, technical difficulties were described as barriers to service uptake and delivery. Conversely, having political and community buy-in, availability of wrap-around services, and collaborative communication from the MySafe team served as facilitators to program implementation. Though community partners preferred establishing MySafe machines into existing community organizations, they also discussed benefits of housing-based MySafe programs. The potential role of this program in mid-sized to rural cities was also emphasized.

CONCLUSIONS

To address the overdose crisis, there is an urgent need to implement and evaluate novel solutions that address supply drivers of crisis. Community partner-informed research plays an integral role in ensuring program acceptability and proper implementation. Our findings identify current gaps and facilitators underlying the efficacy of one such model, together with future directions for improvement. Participant recommendations included a diversification of medications offered and types of locations for MySafe programs, a streamlined national approach to prescribing guidelines coupled with more robust training for healthcare professionals, and an emphasis on service delivery within an integrated services model. Our findings underscore a potential gap between the goals of healthcare providers in ensuring comprehensive care and the necessity for low-barrier models such as MySafe that can function both within and outside of integrated service models.