COVID-19-Related Changes to Drug-Selling Networks and Their Effects on People Who Use Illicit Opioids

Strategies used to reduce harms associated with fentanyl exposure among rural people who use drugs: multi-site qualitative findings from the rural opioid initiative

AIM

Illicitly manufactured fentanyl and its analogs are the primary drivers of opioid overdose deaths in the United States (U.S.). People who use drugs may be exposed to fentanyl or its analogs intentionally or unintentionally. This study sought to identify strategies used by rural people who use drugs to reduce harms associated with unintentional fentanyl exposure.

METHODS

This analysis focused on 349 semi-structured qualitative interviews across 10 states and 58 rural counties in the U.S conducted between 2018 and 2020. Interview guides were collaboratively standardized across sites and included questions about drug use history (including drugs currently used, frequency of use, mode of administration) and questions specific to fentanyl. Deductive coding was used to code all data, then inductive coding of overdose and fentanyl codes was conducted by an interdisciplinary writing team.

RESULTS

Participants described being concerned that fentanyl had saturated the drug market, in both stimulant and opioid supplies. Participants utilized strategies including: (1) avoiding drugs that were perceived to contain fentanyl, (2) buying drugs from trusted sources, (3) using fentanyl test strips, 4) using small doses and non-injection routes, (5) using with other people, (6) tasting, smelling, and looking at drugs before use, and (7) carrying and using naloxone. Most people who used drugs used a combination of these strategies as there was an overwhelming fear of fatal overdose.

CONCLUSION

People who use drugs living in rural areas of the U.S. are aware that fentanyl is in their drug supply and use several strategies to prevent associated harms, including fatal overdose. Increasing access to harm reduction tools (e.g., fentanyl test strips, naloxone) and services (e.g., community drug checking, syringe services programs, overdose prevention centers) should be prioritized to address the polysubstance-involved overdose crisis. These efforts should target persons who use opioids and other drugs that may contain fentanyl.

Enhancing drug checking services for supply monitoring: perspectives on implementation in syringe service programs in the USA

BACKGROUND

Shifts in the US drug supply, including the proliferation of synthetic opioids and emergence of xylazine, have contributed to the worsening toll of the overdose epidemic. Drug checking services offer a critical intervention to promote agency among people who use drugs (PWUD) to reduce overdose risk. Current drug checking methods can be enhanced to contribute to supply-level monitoring in the USA, overcoming the selection bias associated with existing supply monitoring efforts and informing public health interventions.

METHODS

As a group of analytical chemists, public health researchers, evaluators, and harm reductionists, we used a semi-structured guide to facilitate discussion of four different approaches for syringe service programs (SSPs) to offer drug checking services for supply-level monitoring. Using thematic analysis, we identified four key principles that SSPs should consider when implementing drug checking programs.

RESULTS

A number of analytical methods exist for drug checking to contribute to supply-level monitoring. While there is likely not a one-size-fits-all approach, SSPs should prioritize methods that can (1) provide immediate utility to PWUD, (2) integrate seamlessly into existing workflows, (3) balance individual- and population-level data needs, and (4) attend to legal concerns for implementation and dissemination.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhancing drug checking methods for supply-level monitoring has the potential to detect emerging threats in the drug supply and reduce the toll of the worsening overdose epidemic.

Racial, Ethnic, and Sex Differences in Methadone-Involved Overdose Deaths Before and After the US Federal Policy Change Expanding Take-home Methadone Doses

Importance

In March 2020, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) permitted states to relax restrictions on take-home methadone doses for treatment-adherent patients to minimize COVID-19 exposures.

Objective

To assess whether the methadone take-home policy change was associated with drug overdose deaths among different racial, ethnic, and sex groups.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Interrupted time series analysis from January 1, 2018, to June 30, 2022. Data analysis was conducted from February 18, 2023, to February 28, 2023. In this population-based cohort study of drug overdose mortality including 14 529 methadone-involved deaths, monthly counts of methadone-involved drug overdose deaths were obtained for 6 demographic groups: Hispanic men and women, non-Hispanic Black men and women, and non-Hispanic White men and women.

Exposure

On March 16, 2020, in response to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, SAMHSA issued an exemption to the states that permitted up to 28 days of take-home methadone for stable patients and 14 days for less stable patients.

Main Outcome Measures

Monthly methadone-involved overdose deaths.

Results

From January 1, 2018, to June 30, 2022 (54 months), there were 14 529 methadone-involved deaths in the United States; 14 112 (97.1%) occurred in the study's 6 demographic groups (Black men, 1234; Black women, 754; Hispanic men, 1061; Hispanic women, 520; White men, 5991; and White women, 4552). Among Black men, there was a decrease in monthly methadone deaths associated with the March 2020 policy change (change of slope from the preintervention period, -0.55 [95% CI, -0.95 to -0.15]). Hispanic men also experienced a decrease in monthly methadone deaths associated with the policy change (-0.42 [95% CI, -0.68 to -0.17]). Among Black women, Hispanic women, White men, and White women, the policy change was not associated with a change in monthly methadone deaths (Black women, -0.27 [95% CI, -1.13 to 0.59]; Hispanic women, 0.29 [95% CI, -0.46 to 1.04]; White men, -0.08 [95% CI, -1.05 to 0.88]; and White women, -0.43 [95% CI, -1.26 to 0.40]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this interrupted time series study of monthly methadone-involved overdose deaths, the take-home policy may have helped reduce deaths for Black and Hispanic men but had no association with deaths of Black or Hispanic women or White men or women.

Enumerating contributions of fentanyls and other factors to the unprecedented 2020 rise in opioid overdose deaths: model-based analysis

In 2020, the ongoing US opioid overdose crisis collided with the emerging COVID-19 pandemic. Opioid overdose deaths (OODs) rose an unprecedented 38%, due to a combination of COVID-19 disrupting services essential to people who use drugs, continued increases in fentanyls in the illicit drug supply, and other factors. How much did these factors contribute to increased OODs? We used a validated simulation model of the opioid overdose crisis, SOURCE, to estimate excess OODs in 2020 and the distribution of that excess attributable to various factors. Factors affecting OODs that could have been disrupted by COVID-19, and for which data were available, included opioid prescribing, naloxone distribution, and receipt of medications for opioid use disorder. We also accounted for fentanyls' presence in the heroin supply. We estimated a total of 18,276 potential excess OODs, including 1,792 lives saved due to increases in buprenorphine receipt and naloxone distribution and decreases in opioid prescribing. Critically, growth in fentanyls drove 43% (7,879) of the excess OODs. A further 8% is attributable to first-ever declines in methadone maintenance treatment and extended-released injectable naltrexone treatment, most likely due to COVID-19-related disruptions. In all, 49% of potential excess OODs remain unexplained, at least some of which are likely due to additional COVID-19-related disruptions. While the confluence of various COVID-19-related factors could have been responsible for more than half of excess OODs, fentanyls continued to play a singular role in excess OODs, highlighting the urgency of mitigating their effects on overdoses.

Synthesising evidence of the effects of COVID-19 regulatory changes on methadone treatment for opioid use disorder: implications for policy

As the USA faces a worsening overdose crisis, improving access to evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) remains a policy priority. Federal regulatory changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic substantially expanded flexibilities on take-home doses for methadone treatment for OUD. These changes have fuelled questions about the effect of new regulations on OUD outcomes and the potential effect on health of permanently integrating these flexibilities into treatment policy going forward. To aide US policy makers as they consider implementing permanent methadone regulatory changes, we conducted a review synthesising peer-reviewed research on the effect of the flexibilities of methadone take-home policies introduced during COVID-19 on methadone programme operations, OUD patient and provider experiences, and patient health outcomes. We interpret the findings in the context of the federal rule-making process and discuss avenues by which these findings can be incorporated and implemented into US policies on substance use treatment going forward.