Needle and Syringe Programs in Rural Areas: Addressing the Intravenous Drug Use Epidemic

Effects of the Communities that Heal (CTH) intervention on perceived opioid-related community stigma in the HEALing Communities Study: results of a multi-site, community-level, cluster-randomized trial

Background

Community stigma against people with opioid use disorder (OUD) and intervention stigma (e.g., toward naloxone) exacerbate the opioid overdose crisis. We examined the effects of the Communities that HEAL (CTH) intervention on perceived opioid-related community stigma by stakeholders in the HEALing Communities Study (HCS).

Methods

We collected three surveys from community coalition members in 66 communities across four states participating in HCS. Communities were randomized into Intervention (Wave 1) or Wait-list Control (Wave 2) arms. We conducted multilevel linear mixed models to compare changes in primary outcomes of community stigma toward people treated for OUD, naloxone, and medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) by arm from time 1 (before the start of the intervention) to time 3 (end of the intervention period in the Intervention arm).

Findings

Intervention stakeholders reported a larger decrease in perceived community stigma toward people treated for OUD (adjusted mean change (AMC) -3.20 [95% C.I. -4.43, -1.98]) and toward MOUD (AMC -0.33 [95% C.I. -0.56, -0.09]) than stakeholders in Wait-list Control communities (AMC -0.18 [95% C.I. -1.38, 1.02], p = 0.0007 and AMC 0.11 [95% C.I. -0.09, 0.31], p = 0.0066). The relationship between intervention status and change in stigma toward MOUD was moderated by rural-urban status (urban AMC -0.59 [95% CI, -0.87, -0.32], rural AMC not sig.) and state. The difference in stigma toward naloxone between Intervention and Wait-list Control stakeholders was not statistically significant (p = 0.18).

Interpretation

The CTH intervention decreased stakeholder perceptions of community stigma toward people treated for OUD and stigma toward MOUD. Implementing the CTH intervention in other communities could decrease OUD stigma across diverse settings nationally.

Funding

US National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on syringe services programs in rural Kentucky

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) exacerbated risks for adverse health consequences among people who inject drugs by reducing access to sterile injection equipment, HIV testing, and syringe services programs (SSPs). Several decades of research demonstrate the public health benefits of SSP implementation; however, existing evidence primarily reflects studies conducted in metropolitan areas and before the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to explore how the COVID-19 pandemic affected SSP operations in rural Kentucky counties.

METHODS

In late 2020, we conducted eighteen in-depth, semi-structured interviews with persons (10 women, 8 men) involved in SSP implementation in rural Kentucky counties. The interview guide broadly explored the barriers and facilitators to SSP implementation in rural communities; participants were also asked to describe how COVID-19 affected SSP operations.

RESULTS

Participants emphasized the need to continue providing SSP-related services throughout the pandemic. COVID-19 mitigation strategies (e.g., masking, social distancing, pre-packing sterile injection equipment) limited relationship building between staff and clients and, more broadly, the pandemic adversely affected overall program expansion, momentum building, and coalition building. However, participants offered multiple examples of innovative solutions to the myriad of obstacles the pandemic presented.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic impacted SSP operations throughout rural Kentucky. Despite challenges, participants reported that providing SSP services remained paramount. Diverse adaptative strategies were employed to ensure continuation of essential SSP services, demonstrating the commitment and ingenuity of program staff. Given that SSPs are essential for preventing adverse injection drug use-associated health consequences, further resources should be invested in SSP operations to ensure service delivery is not negatively affected by co-occurring crises.

PrEP Care Continuum Engagement Among Persons Who Inject Drugs: Rural and Urban Differences in Stigma and Social Infrastructure

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a medication that prevents HIV acquisition, yet PrEP uptake has been low among people who inject drugs. Stigma has been identified as a fundamental driver of population health and may be a significant barrier to PrEP care engagement among PWID. However, there has been limited research on how stigma operates in rural and urban settings in relation to PrEP. Using in-depth semi-structured qualitative interviews (n = 57) we explore PrEP continuum engagement among people actively injecting drugs in rural and urban settings. Urban participants had more awareness and knowledge. Willingness to use PrEP was similar in both settings. However, no participant was currently using PrEP. Stigmas against drug use, HIV, and sexualities were identified as barriers to PrEP uptake, particularly in the rural setting. Syringe service programs in the urban setting were highlighted as a welcoming space where PWID could socialize and therefore mitigate stigma and foster information sharing.

Correlates of disparities in syringe return ratios: A cross-sectional study of a syringe services program in New York

BACKGROUND

Predictors of syringe exchange behavior are critical to informing secondary prevention measures needed to attenuate risk of blood-borne infections among persons who inject drugs (PWID).

METHODS

Participants included PWIDs who attended a syringe services program in New York from 2015 to 2017 (n = 1777). We analyzed the syringe return ratio (receipts/returns) with two distinct but related methodological strategies-threshold logistic regression and quantile regression-to identify correlates of disparities in syringe return ratios.

RESULTS

The majority of participants were white males negative for HIV (90% white, 63% male, 76% HIV-). Logistic and quantile regression models showed that the correlates of disparate syringe return ratios (i.e., magnitude and directionality of differences) changed across different percentile groups and quantile levels, respectively. At the median threshold, being single, urbanicity, and older age were associated with higher return ratios. Syringe return ratio disparities were more pronounced among subgroups of nontypical PWIDs (with extremely low or high return ratios) especially by urbanicity, race, relationship status, and type of housing.

CONCLUSIONS

Irrespective of urbanicity classification, correlates of syringe return ratios such as older age, Black race, single relationship status, and unstable housing appear to be critical to informing targeted secondary prevention initiatives that promote harm reduction behavior.

The impact of rurality on opioid-related harms: A systematic review of qualitative research

INTRODUCTION

Over the past decade, there has been mounting recognition that opioid use and related mortality and morbidity is a significant public health problem in rural, non-urban areas across the globe. Taking what has been termed the 'opioid crisis' as a starting off point, this article aims to systematically review the qualitative literature on the ways in which rurality shapes the risk for opioid-related harm.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken using database searches and secondary reference list searches for qualitative literature on rural and non-urban opioid-related harms. A total of 32 qualitative studies met the inclusion criteria. Data extraction was performed in NVivo 12 using a codebook based on the 'risk environment' framework.

RESULTS

The findings explore how rurality shapes the risk environment for opioid-related harms through four environment influences: (1) economic conditions, including economic transition and deindustrialisation that has occurred in many rural areas, and the high levels of economic distress experienced by rural residents; (2) physical conditions, including a lack of infrastructure and recreation opportunities, larger geographic distances, and limited transportation; (3) social conditions, where social networks could be both protective but also amplify risk through a lack of knowledge about treatment and risk behaviours, a lack of anonymity and stigmatisation of people who use opioids in rural areas; and (4) policy conditions including limited coverage and availability of harm reduction and drug treatment services, and stigmatising service provider practices.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of rurality on risk of opioid-related harm is multifaceted. We suggest that future research on rural opioid use would benefit from drawing on the theoretical toolkit of rural criminology to attend to the ways the 'rural crisis', and attendant insecurities, anxieties and strains, impacts upon rural communities and shapes risk, along with how socio-cultural characteristics of the rural 'organise' risks of drug use.