Effectiveness of needle/syringe programmes and opiate substitution therapy in preventing HCV transmission among people who inject drugs.

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the impact of needle/syringe programmes with and without opiate substitution therapy (OST) on the incidence of HCV infection among people who inject drugs (PWID).To assess the effect of OST alone on the incidence of HCV infection among PWID. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: How effective are needle/syringe programmes (NSP) with and without the use of OST for reducing HCV incidence among PWID?How effective is OST alone for reducing HCV incidence among PWID?How does the effect of NSP and OST vary according to duration of treatment (i.e. for NSPs weekly attendance versus monthly)?How does the effect of NSP vary according to the type of service (fixed site versus mobile; high coverage versus low coverage)?How does the effect of OST vary according to the dosage of OST, type of substitution used and adherence to treatment?

Interventions to prevent HIV and Hepatitis C among people who inject drugs: Latest evidence of effectiveness from a systematic review (2011 to 2020).

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HIV remain prevalent among people who inject drugs (PWID) and transmission is usually associated with injecting risk behaviour (IRB). We update a 2011 review of reviews (RoR) to assess the latest evidence on the effectiveness of harm reduction interventions - drug treatment (including opioid agonist therapy [OAT]), needle and syringe programmes (NSP) and other interventions - in the prevention of HCV and HIV transmission, and related measures of infection risk (IRB and injecting frequency [IF]), among PWID. METHODS: We undertook an initial search for systematic reviews (i.e. an Overview of Reviews [OoR]) and subsequent systematic searches for primary studies where required. Where there was sufficient evidence based on synthesis of multiple robust studies for an intervention effect in the 2011 RoR, new evidence was not sought. Medline, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched (2011-2020). Two reviewers screened papers, extracted data, and graded reviews/studies. We classified evidence as 'sufficient', 'tentative', 'insufficient', or 'no evidence'. RESULTS: We screened 8513 reviews and 7133 studies, with 27 and 61 identified as relevant, respectively. The level of evidence increased since the 2011 RoR and is now 'sufficient' for OAT (regarding all outcomes), NSP (for reducing HIV transmission and IRB), and combination OAT/NSP (for reducing HCV transmission). There is also now sufficient evidence for in-prison OAT, psychosocial interventions, pharmacy-based NSP and provision of sterile drug preparation equipment for reducing IRB. CONCLUSION: There is now a strong body of empirical evidence for the effectiveness of OAT and NSP, alone and in combination, in reducing IRB, and HCV and HIV transmission. However, there is still a relative lack of evidence for other interventions, including heroin-assisted treatment, pharmacological treatment for stimulant dependence, contingency management, technology-based interventions, low dead space syringes and drug consumption rooms on HCV or HIV risk.

The uptake of foil from needle and syringe provision services and its role in smoking or snorting heroin among people who inject drugs in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, legislation was implemented in 2014 allowing needle and syringe provision (NSP) services to offer foil to people who inject drugs (PWID) to encourage smoking rather than injecting. This paper aims to examine the association between foil uptake and smoking or snorting heroin among PWID. This is the first large scale national study to examine foil uptake and smoking or snorting heroin among PWID post legislative change. METHOD: Data from 1453 PWID interviewed via Scotland's Needle Exchange Surveillance Initiative in 2017-2018 were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 36% of PWID had obtained foil from NSP services in the past six months. The odds of smoking or snorting heroin were higher among those who had obtained foil (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 3.79 (95% CI 2.98-4.82) p<0.001) compared to those who had not. Smoking or snorting heroin was associated with lower odds of injecting four or more times daily (AOR 0.60 (95% CI 0.40-0.90) p = 0.012) and injecting into the groin or neck (AOR 0.57 (95% CI 0.46-0.71) p<0.001) but increased odds of having had a skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) (AOR 1.49 (95% CI 1.17-1.89) p = 0.001) and having experienced an overdose (AOR 1.58 (95% CI 1.18-2.10) p = 0.002) both in the past year. CONCLUSION: The promotion of smoking drugs via foil provision from NSP services may contribute to the package of harm reduction measures for PWID alongside the provision of injecting equipment. We found that those in receipt of foil were more likely to smoke or snort heroin, and that smoking or snorting heroin was associated with a lower likelihood of some risky injecting behaviours, namely frequent injecting and injecting into the groin or neck. But it remains uncertain if the provision of foil can lead to a reduction in health harms, such as SSTI and overdose. Future research is needed to understand PWID motivations for smoking drugs, obtaining foil from NSP services, and its uses particularly among polydrug users.

The provision of non-needle/syringe drug injecting paraphernalia in the primary prevention of HCV among IDU: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Sharing drug injecting paraphernalia other than needles and syringes (N/S) has been implicated in the transmission of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) among injecting drug users (IDU). We aimed to determine whether the provision of sterile non-N/S injecting paraphernalia reduces injecting risk behaviours or HCV transmission among IDU. METHODS: A systematic search of seven databases and the grey literature for articles published January 1989-February 2010 was undertaken. Thirteen studies (twelve observational and one non-randomized uncontrolled pilot intervention) were identified and appraised for study design and quality by two investigators. RESULTS: No studies examined the association between the provision of non-N/S injecting paraphernalia and incident HCV infection. One cross-sectional study found that individuals who frequently, compared to those who infrequently, used sterile cookers and water, were less likely to report prevalent HCV infection. Another found no association between the uptake of sterile non-N/S injecting paraphernalia and self-reported sharing of this paraphernalia. The remaining observational studies used attendance at needle and syringe exchange programmes (NSP) or safer injection facilities (SIF) that provided non-N/S injecting paraphernalia as a proxy measure. Eight studies presented adjusted odds ratios, ranging from 0.3 to 0.9, suggesting a reduced likelihood of self-reported sharing of non-N/S injecting paraphernalia associated with use of NSP or SIF. There was substantial uncertainty associated with these estimates however. Three unadjusted studies reported a reduction in the prevalence of sharing of non-N/S injecting paraphernalia over time among NSP users. Only one study reported an adjusted temporal trend in the prevalence of sharing non-N/S injecting paraphernalia, finding higher rates among non-NSP users than NSP users at each time point, and a greater reduction in sharing among non-NSP than NSP users over time. Study limitations included the use of convenience samples, self-reported exposure and outcome measures, flawed classification of the exposed and unexposed groups, and inadequate adjustment for potential confounding variables. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence to demonstrate that the provision of sterile non-N/S injecting paraphernalia reduces HCV transmission or modifies injecting risk behaviours is currently limited by an insufficient volume and quality of studies. Further research is required to inform practice and policy in this area.

Needle and syringe programmes and opioid substitution therapy for preventing HCV transmission among people who inject drugs: findings from a Cochrane Review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: To estimate the effects of needle and syringe programmes (NSP) and opioid substitution therapy (OST), alone or in combination, for preventing acquisition of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in people who inject drugs (PWID). METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Bibliographic databases were searched for studies measuring concurrent exposure to current OST (within the last 6 months) and/or NSP and HCV incidence among PWID. High NSP coverage was defined as regular NSP attendance or ≥ 100% coverage (receiving sufficient or greater number of needles and syringes per reported injecting frequency). Studies were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias in non-randomized studies tool. Random-effects models were used in meta-analysis. RESULTS: We identified 28 studies (n = 6279) in North America (13), United Kingdom (five), Europe (four), Australia (five) and China (one). Studies were at moderate (two), serious (17) critical (seven) and non-assessable risk of bias (two). Current OST is associated with 50% [risk ratio (RR) =0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.40-0.63] reduction in HCV acquisition risk, consistent across region and with low heterogeneity (I2  = 0, P = 0.889). Weaker evidence was found for high NSP coverage (RR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.39-1.61) with high heterogeneity (I2  = 77%, P = 0.002). After stratifying by region, high NSP coverage in Europe was associated with a 56% reduction in HCV acquisition risk (RR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.24-0.80) with low heterogeneity (I2  = 12.3%, P = 0.337), but not in North America (RR = 1.58, I2  = 89.5%, P = < 0.001). Combined OST/NSP is associated with a 74% reduction in HCV acquisition risk (RR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.07-0.89, I2  = 80% P = 0.007). According to Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, the evidence on OST and combined OST/NSP is low quality, while NSP is very low. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid substitution therapy reduces risk of hepatitis C acquisition and is strengthened in combination with needle and syringe programmes (NSP). There is weaker evidence for the impact of needle syringe programmes alone, although stronger evidence that high coverage is associated with reduced risk in Europe.

Expansion of HCV treatment access to people who have injected drugs through effective translation of research into public health policy: Scotland's experience.

Seven years have elapsed since the Scottish Government launched its Hepatitis C Action Plan - a Plan to improve services to prevent transmission of infection, particularly among people who inject drugs (PWID), identify those infected and ensure those infected receive optimal treatment. The Plan was underpinned by industrial scale funding (around £100 million, in addition to the general NHS funding, will have been invested by 2015), and a web of accountable national and local multi-disciplinary multi-agency networks responsible for the planning, development and delivery of services. Initiatives ranged from the introduction of testing in specialist drug services through finger-prick blood sampling by non-clinical staff, to the setting of government targets to ensure rapid scale-up of antiviral therapy. The Plan was informed by comprehensive national monitoring systems, indicating the extent of the problem not just in terms of numbers infected, diagnosed and treated but also the more penetrative data on the number advancing to end-stage liver disease and death, and also through compelling modelling work demonstrating the potential beneficial impact of scaling-up therapy and the mounting cost of not acting. Achievements include around 50% increase in the proportion of the infected population diagnosed (38% to 55%); a sustained near two-and-a-half fold increase in the annual number of people initiated onto therapy (470 to 1050) with more pronounced increases among PWID (300 to 840) and prisoners (20 to 140); and reversing of an upward trend in the overall number of people living with chronic infection. The Action Plan has demonstrated that a Government-backed, coordinated and invested approach can transform services and rapidly improve the lives of thousands. Cited as "an impressive example of a national strategy" by the Global Commission on Drug Policy, the Scottish Plan has also provided fundamental insights of international relevance into the management of HCV among PWID.

Interventions to prevent HIV and Hepatitis C in people who inject drugs: a review of reviews to assess evidence of effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Injecting drug use is a major risk factor for the acquisition and transmission of HIV and Hepatitis C virus (HCV). Prevention of these infections among people who inject drugs (PWID) is critical to reduce ongoing transmission, morbidity and mortality. METHODS: A review of reviews was undertaken involving systematic literature searches of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychINFO, IBSS and the Cochrane Library (2000-2011) to identify English language reviews regarding the effectiveness of harm reduction interventions in relation to HIV transmission, HCV transmission and injecting risk behaviour (IRB). Interventions included needle and syringe programmes (NSP); the provision of injection paraphernalia; opiate substitution treatment (OST); information, education and counselling (IEC); and supervised injecting facilities (SIFs). Reviews were classified into 'core' or 'supplementary' using critical appraisal criteria, and the strength of review-level evidence was assessed. RESULTS: Twelve core and thirteen supplementary reviews were included. From these reviews we identified: (i) for NSP: tentative review-level evidence to support effectiveness in reducing HIV transmission, insufficient review-level evidence relating to HCV transmission, but sufficient review-level evidence in relation to IRB; (ii) for OST: sufficient review-level evidence of effectiveness in relation to HIV transmission and IRB, but tentative review-level evidence in relation to HCV transmission; (iii) for IEC, the provision of injection paraphernalia and SIFs: tentative review-level evidence of effectiveness in reducing IRB; and either insufficient or no review-level evidence for these interventions in relation to HIV or HCV transmission. CONCLUSION: Review-level evidence indicates that harm reduction interventions can reduce IRB, with evidence strongest for OST and NSP. However, there is comparatively little review-level evidence regarding the effectiveness of these interventions in preventing HCV transmission among PWID. Further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness and impact of scaling up comprehensive packages of harm reduction interventions to minimise HIV and HCV transmission among PWID.