Preparing for Mpox Resurgence: Surveillance Lessons From Outbreaks in Toronto, Canada.

BACKGROUND: With many global jurisdictions, Toronto, Canada, experienced an mpox outbreak in spring/summer 2022. Cases declined following implementation of a large vaccination campaign. A surge in early 2023 led to speculation that asymptomatic and/or undetected local transmission was occurring in the city. METHODS: Mpox cases and positive laboratory results are reported to Toronto Public Health. Epidemic curves and descriptive risk factor summaries for the 2022 and 2023 outbreaks were generated. First- and second-dose vaccination was monitored. Mpox virus wastewater surveillance and whole genome sequencing were conducted to generate hypotheses about the source of the 2023 resurgence. RESULTS: An overall 515 cases were reported in spring/summer 2022 and 17 in the 2022-2023 resurgence. Wastewater data correlated with the timing of cases. Whole genome sequencing showed that 2022-2023 cases were distinct from 2022 cases and closer to sequences from another country, suggesting a new importation as a source. At the start of the resurgence, approximately 16% of first-dose vaccine recipients had completed their second dose. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation demonstrates the importance of ongoing surveillance and preparedness for mpox outbreaks. Undetected local transmission was not a likely source of the 2022-2023 resurgence. Ongoing preexposure vaccine promotion remains important to mitigate disease burden.

Considerations for the design of overdose education and naloxone distribution interventions: results of a multi-stakeholder workshop.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdose epidemic is a public health crisis that is impacting communities around the world. Overdose education and naloxone distribution programs equip and train lay people to respond in the event of an overdose. We aimed to understand factors to consider for the design of naloxone distribution programs in point-of-care settings from the point of view of community stakeholders. METHODS: We hosted a multi-stakeholder co-design workshop to elicit suggestions for a naloxone distribution program. We recruited people with lived experience of opioid overdose, community representatives, and other stakeholders from family practice, emergency medicine, addictions medicine, and public health to participate in a full-day facilitated co-design discussion wherein large and small group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic approaches. RESULTS: A total of twenty-four participants participated in the multi-stakeholder workshop from five stakeholder groups including geographic and setting diversity. Collaborative dialogue and shared storytelling revealed seven considerations for the design of naloxone distribution programs specific to training needs and the provision of naloxone, these are: recognizing overdose, how much naloxone, impact of stigma, legal risk of responding, position as conventional first aid, friends and family as responders, support to call 911. CONCLUSION: To create an naloxone distribution program in emergency departments, family practice and substance use treatment services, stigma is a central design consideration for training and naloxone kits. Design choices that reference the iconography, type, and form of materials associated with first aid have the potential to satisfy the need to de-stigmatize overdose response.

Community and Health Care Provider Preferences for Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing Interventions for Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men: e-Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Canadian clinical guidelines recommend at least annual and up to quarterly bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing among sexually active gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM). However, testing rates are suboptimal. Innovative solutions are needed to close the gap because there is currently limited knowledge on how best to approach this issue. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to build consensus regarding interventions with the greatest potential for improving local STI testing services for GBM communities in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, using a web-based e-Delphi process. METHODS: The e-Delphi method involves using a panel format to conduct successive rounds of prioritization, with feedback between rounds, to determine priorities among groups. We recruited experts separately from the community (GBM who sought or underwent STI testing in the preceding 18 months; conducted between October 2019 and November 2019) and health care providers (those who offered STI testing to GBM in the past 12 months; conducted between February 2020 and May 2020). The experts prioritized 6 to 8 potential interventions on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from definitely not a priority to definitely a priority over 3 survey rounds and ranked their top 3 interventions. Consensus was defined as ≥60% within a ±1 response point. Summaries of responses were provided in successive rounds. We reported the percentage of a priority (encompassing somewhat a priority, a priority, and definitely a priority responses) at the end of the final round of the survey. RESULTS: Of the community experts (CEs), 84% (43/51) completed all rounds; 19% (8/43) were living with HIV; 37% (16/43) were HIV negative and on pre-exposure prophylaxis; and 42% (18/43) were HIV negative and not on pre-exposure prophylaxis. We reached consensus on 6 interventions: client reminders (41/43, 95%), express testing (38/43, 88%), routine testing (36/43, 84%), an online booking app (36/43, 84%), online-based testing (33/43, 77%), and nurse-led testing (31/43, 72%). The CEs favored convenient interventions that also maintain a relationship with their provider. Of the provider experts (PEs), 77% (37/48) completed all rounds; 59% (22/37) were physicians. Consensus was reached on the same 6 interventions (range 25/37, 68%, to 39/39, 100%) but not for provider alerts (7/37, 19%) and provider audit and feedback (6/37, 16%). Express testing, online-based testing, and nurse-led testing were prioritized by >95% (>37/39) of the PEs by the end of round 2 because of streamlined processes and decreased need to see a provider. CONCLUSIONS: Both panels were enthusiastic about innovations that make STI testing more efficient, with express testing rating highly in both the prioritizations and top 3 rankings. However, CEs preferred convenient interventions that involved their provider, whereas PEs favored interventions that prioritized patient independence and reduced patient-provider time. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/13801.

Design details for overdose education and take-home naloxone kits: Codesign with family medicine, emergency department, addictions medicine and community.

INTRODUCTION: Overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programmes equip and train people who are likely to witness an opioid overdose to respond with effective first aid interventions. Despite OEND expansion across North America, overdose rates are increasing, raising questions about how to improve OEND programmes. We conducted an iterative series of codesign stakeholder workshops to develop a prototype for take-home naloxone (THN)-kit (i.e., two doses of intranasal naloxone and training on how to administer it). METHODS: We recruited people who use opioids, frontline healthcare providers and public health representatives to participate in codesign workshops covering questions related to THN-kit prototypes, training on how to use it, and implementation, including refinement of design artefacts using personas and journey maps. Completed over 9 months, the workshops were audio-recorded and transcribed with visible results of the workshops (i.e., sticky notes, sketches) archived. We used thematic analyses of these materials to identify design requirements for THN-kits and training. RESULTS: We facilitated 13 codesign workshops to identify and address gaps in existing opioid overdose education training and THN-kits and emphasize timely response and stigma in future THN-kit design. Using an iterative process, we created 15 prototypes, 3 candidate prototypes and a final prototype THN-kit from the synthesis of the codesign workshops. CONCLUSION: The final prototype is available for a variety of implementation and evaluation processes. The THN-kit offers an integrated solution combining ultra-brief training animation and physical packaging of nasal naloxone to be distributed in family practice clinics, emergency departments, addiction medicine clinics and community settings. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The codesign process was deliberately structured to involve community members (the public), with multiple opportunities for public contribution. In addition, patient/public participation was a principle for the management and structuring of the research team.

Can naloxone prescription and overdose training for opioid users work in family practice? Perspectives of family physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To explore family physicians' attitudes toward prescribing naloxone to at-risk opioid users, as well as to determine the opportunities and challenges for expanding naloxone access to patients in family practice settings. DESIGN: One-hour focus group session and SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. SETTING: Workshop held at the 2012 Family Medicine Forum in Toronto, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen conference attendees from 3 Canadian cities who practised in various family practice settings and who agreed to participate in the workshop. METHODS: The workshop included an overview of information about naloxone distribution and overdose education programs, followed by group discussion in smaller focus groups. Participants were instructed to focus their discussion on the question, "Could this [overdose education and naloxone prescription] work in your practice?" and to record notes using a standardized discussion guide based on a SWOT analysis. Two investigators reviewed the forms, extracting themes using an open coding process. MAIN FINDINGS: Some participants believed that naloxone could be used safely among family practice patients, that the intervention fit well with their clinical practice settings, and that its use in family practice could enhance engagement with at-risk individuals and create an opportunity to educate patients, providers, and the public about overdose. Participants also indicated that the current guidelines and support systems for prescribing or administering naloxone were inadequate, that medicolegal uncertainties existed for those who prescribed or administered naloxone, and that high-quality evidence about the intervention's effectiveness in family practice was lacking. CONCLUSION: Family physicians believe that overdose education and naloxone prescription might provide patients at risk of opioid overdose in their practices with broad access to a potentially lifesaving intervention. However, they explain that there are key barriers currently limiting widespread implementation of naloxone use in family practice settings.

Mixed methods feasibility study for the surviving opioid overdose with naloxone education and resuscitation (SOONER) trial.

AIM: We plan to conduct a randomised clinical trial among people likely to witness opioid overdose to compare the educational effectiveness of point-of-care naloxone distribution with best-available care, by observing participants' resuscitation skills in a simulated overdose. This mixed methods feasibility study aims to assess the effectiveness of recruitment and retention strategies and acceptability of study procedures. METHODS: We implemented candidate-driven recruitment strategies with verbal consent and destigmatizing study materials in a family practice, emergency department, and addictions service. People ≥16 years of age who are likely to witness overdose were randomized to point-of-care naloxone distribution or referral to an existing program. We evaluated participant skills as a responder to a simulated overdose 3-14 days post-recruitment. Retention strategies included flexible scheduling, reminders, cash compensation and refreshments. The primary outcome was recruitment and retention feasibility, defined as the ability to recruit 28 eligible participants in 28 days, with <50% attrition at the outcome simulation. Acceptability of study procedures and motivations for participation were assessed in a semi-structured interview. RESULTS: We enrolled 30 participants over 24 days, and retained 21 participants (70%, 95%CI 56.7-100). The most common motivation for participation was a desire to serve the community or loved ones in distress. Participants reported that study procedures were acceptable and that the outcome simulation provided a supportive and affirming environment. CONCLUSION: The planned trial is ready for implementation. Recruitment and retention is feasible and study processes are acceptable for people who are likely to witness overdose. (Registration: NCT03821649).