Prescribing trends in direct-acting antivirals for the treatment of hepatitis C in Ontario, Canada.

Background: Direct-acting antivirals (DAA) offer an opportunity to cure hepatitis C. Reimbursement for DAAs has changed on two occasions since their inclusion on the Ontario public formulary. Whether these changes have appreciably modified prescribing patterns and increased access to DAAs is unknown. Methods: We conducted a repeated cross-sectional study of DAA reimbursement by the Ontario Public Drug Programs from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018, to summarize the use of DAAs in Ontario and describe changes in DAA prescribing physician specialties over this period. We measured the total number of users quarterly. Results are reported overall and by prescriber type. Results: A total of 27,116 individuals received a publicly funded prescription for a DAA from the first quarter (Q1) of 2012 to the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2018. Nearly two-thirds (n = 17,813; 65.7%) of all DAAs were prescribed by gastroenterologists, hepatologists, or infectious disease specialists. Use of DAAs over time appears to have had three major phases in uptake: (1) the introduction of DAA treatments on the Ontario public drug formulary as a prior authorization benefit in Q1 2015, (2) expanded listing of all DAAs as limited-use products on the formulary in Q1 2017, and (3) the introduction of newer DAAs in Q2 2018. Conclusions: Changes in listing of these agents had a direct impact on the use of DAAs overall. Generally, broader listing expanded access but did not appear to shift utilization patterns to primary care prescribers. Further understanding of who is not receiving treatment is needed.

Critical studies of harm reduction: Overdose response in uncertain political times.

North America continues to witness escalating rates of opioid overdose deaths. Scale-up of existing and innovative life-saving services - such as overdose prevention sites (OPS) as well as sanctioned and unsanctioned supervised consumption sites - is urgently needed. Is there a place for critical theory-informed studies of harm reduction during times of drug policy failures and overdose crisis? There are different approaches to consider from the critical literature, such as those that, for example, interrogate the basic principles of harm reduction or those that critique the lack of pleasure in the discourses surrounding drug use. Influenced by such work, we examine the development of OPS in Canada, with a focus on recent experiences from the province of Ontario, as an important example of the impacts associated with moving from grassroots harm reduction to institutionalised policy and practice. Services appear to be most innovative, dynamic, and inclusive when people with lived experience, allies, and service providers are directly responding to fast-changing drug use patterns and crises on the ground, before services become formally bureaucratised. We suggest a continuing need to both critically theorise harm reduction and to build strong community relationships in harm reduction work, in efforts to overcome political moves that impede collaboration with and inclusiveness of people who use drugs.

Help me fix: The provision of injection assistance at an unsanctioned overdose prevention site in Toronto, Canada.

BACKGROUND: There is an acute public health crisis from opioid-related poisoning and overdose in Canada. The Moss Park Overdose Prevention Site (MP-OPS) - an unsanctioned overdose prevention site - opened in a downtown park in Toronto in August 2017, when no other supervised consumption services existed in the province. As an unsanctioned site, MP-OPS was not constrained by federal rules prohibiting assisted injection, and provided a unique opportunity to examine assisted injection within a supervised setting. Our objective was to examine the association between assisted injection and overdose, and whether any association between assisted injection and overdose differs according to gender. METHODS: Drawing on data from 5657 visits to MP-OPS from October 2017 to March 2018, we used multivariable logistic regression to investigate the relationship between assisted injection and overdose. To examine the influence of gender on this relationship, we further conducted stratified analyses by gender. RESULTS: Among 5657 visits to MP-OPS, 471 (8.3%) received assisted injection, of which 242 (51.4%) were received by women and 226 (48.0%) by men. Using multivariable logistic regression, assisted injection was not associated with overdose in the overall sample (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94, 2.67). In gender-stratified models, women receiving assisted injection were more than twice as likely (aOR 2.23, 95% CI: 1.17, 4.27) to experience overdose than women who did not receive assisted injection, and no association between assisted injection and overdose was found among men. CONCLUSION: Findings that women receiving assisted injecting are at higher odds of overdose within the supervised setting of the MP-OPS are consistent with previous literature on assisted injection in community settings. Rules banning assisted injection in supervised consumption services may be putting a group of people, particularly women and those injecting fentanyl, at higher risk of health harms by denying them access to a supervised space where prompt overdose response is available.