Neighborhood and Individual Disparities in Community-Based Naloxone Access for Opioid Overdose Prevention.

Improving access to naloxone for laypersons is a cornerstone of the US strategy to reduce opioid overdose deaths. This study evaluated change in distance to opioid overdose prevention programs (OOPPs) providing walk-in naloxone across two time points. We also explored individual and neighborhood disparities in distance to OOPPs, associations between 2020 OOPP locations and 2018 overdoses, and associations between OOPPs and neighborhood fatal overdose rates. Using fatal opioid overdose locations in 2018 (n = 1167) and 2020 (n = 2045) in New York City, we mapped OOPP locations and fatal overdose locations to visualize areas of unmet naloxone need. We used logistic regression to assess individual (age, sex, race/ethnicity) and neighborhood correlates of odds of an overdose occurring within walking distance (≤ 0.5 miles or 0.8 km) of an OOPP and negative binomial regression to assess the relationship between census tract-level OOPP counts and overdose rates. Distance to OOPPs significantly improved over time, with average distance decreasing by 1.7 miles (2.7 km) (p < 0.001). OOPPs were more likely to be located in neighborhoods with higher poverty in both years and in closer proximity to Latinos in 2020-suggesting improved access for Latinos and in higher poverty neighborhoods. OOPP locations in 2020 were significantly positively associated with overdose locations in 2018. OOPPs were not well-situated in neighborhoods with elevated overdose rates in 2018 but were better situated in 2020, controlling for other neighborhood variables. Community lay naloxone access through OOPPs improved over time and could have promising effects for improved overdose rates in the future.

Reducing the Likelihood of Opioid Overdose Fatalities on College and University Campuses: An Action Plan and Model.

For more than two decades there has been a continuous rise in opioid overdose related deaths. The majority of the deaths include the age range when, traditionally, individuals are likely to attend college or university. As a result, Vassar College has taken the important initiative and created and implemented a new opioid overdose intervention strategy and action plan called AED+. AED+ expands on the Model of Greater Awareness, Training and Increased Availability of and Accessibility to Life Saving Intervention Devices; a model that was created based on AED devices improving outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest emergencies. Similar to AED's improving out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes, the + component of the AED+ initiative increases awareness and provides basic, targeted education about naloxone and its use. Furthermore, the education includes information about naloxone's greater availability and its more immediate access across the campus by students, staff, faculty, administrators, and visitors in the event of a suspected opioid overdose. Starting in May 2023, members of the school's Health Service and senior administrative leaders identified it necessary to be proactive and not reactive to managing an opioid overdose in the campus community. Although Vassar College has not recently experienced an opioid overdose, it is confidently projected that these targeted actions will proactively and positively reduce the likelihood of opioid-related fatalities on campus. Furthermore, it is the purpose of this article to share the AED+ model so other colleges and universities can modify it to best fit their unique setting in order to improve opioid overdose outcomes.

Naloxone Knowledge and Attitudes Towards Overdose Response Among Family Members of People who Misuse Opioids.

Providing family members of individuals with opioid use disorders (OUD) naloxone is a cost-effective way to prevent overdose deaths. However, misconceptions and negative attitudes towards naloxone hinder family engagement with naloxone programs. This study examines factors associated with knowledge and attitudes toward naloxone among adults with close family members who misused opioids. Adults with family members (parent, step-parent, child, spouse, sibling, or step-sibling) who misused opioids (N = 299) completed a web-based survey. Participants were recruited through treatment providers, community groups, and social media. Surveys assessed naloxone knowledge, attitudes toward overdose response, demographics, completion of naloxone training, attitude toward medications for OUD, and family members' overdose history. Multiple regression was used to identify factors associated with naloxone knowledge (Model 1) and attitudes toward overdose response (Model 2). A graduate degree (B = .35, p < .003) and a history of overdose (B = 0.21, p = .032) were associated with greater naloxone knowledge. Age (B = .11, p < .001), race/ethnicity (B = -1.39, p = .037), naloxone training (B = 2.70, p < .001), and more positive attitude toward medications for OUD (B = 1.50, p = .003) were associated with attitudes toward overdose response. Family members are potential allies in reducing drug overdose deaths, and families may need broader education about naloxone. Awareness of previous overdose was associated with greater naloxone knowledge. Findings related to race/ethnicity suggest the need to reach family members of minoritized racial groups to provide access to naloxone training. Findings point to where education and distribution efforts may focus on increasing knowledge and improving attitudes among those closest to people with OUD.

Public Health Dashboards in Overdose Prevention: The Rhode Island Approach to Public Health Data Literacy, Partnerships, and Action.

As the field of public health rises to the demands of real-time surveillance and rapid data-sharing needs in a postpandemic world, it is time to examine our approaches to the dissemination and accessibility of such data. Distinct challenges exist when working to develop a shared public health language and narratives based on data. It requires that we assess our understanding of public health data literacy, revisit our approach to communication and engagement, and continuously evaluate our impact and relevance. Key stakeholders and cocreators are critical to this process and include people with lived experience, community organizations, governmental partners, and research institutions. In this viewpoint paper, we offer an instructive approach to the tools we used, assessed, and adapted across 3 unique overdose data dashboard projects in Rhode Island, United States. We are calling this model the "Rhode Island Approach to Public Health Data Literacy, Partnerships, and Action." This approach reflects the iterative lessons learned about the improvement of data dashboards through collaboration and strong partnerships across community members, state agencies, and an academic research team. We will highlight key tools and approaches that are accessible and engaging and allow developers and stakeholders to self-assess their goals for their data dashboards and evaluate engagement with these tools by their desired audiences and users.

High-dose naloxone formulations are not as essential as we thought.

Naloxone is an effective FDA-approved opioid antagonist for reversing opioid overdoses. Naloxone is available to the public and can be administered through intramuscular (IM), intravenous (IV), and intranasal spray (IN) routes. Our literature review investigates the adequacy of two doses of standard IM or IN naloxone in reversing fentanyl overdoses compared to newer high-dose naloxone formulations. Moreover, our initiative incorporates the experiences of people who use drugs, enabling a more practical and contextually-grounded analysis. The evidence indicates that the vast majority of fentanyl overdoses can be successfully reversed using two standard IM or IN dosages. Exceptions include cases of carfentanil overdose, which necessitates ≥ 3 doses for reversal. Multiple studies documented the risk of precipitated withdrawal using ≥ 2 doses of naloxone, notably including the possibility of recurring overdose symptoms after resuscitation, contingent upon the half-life of the specific opioid involved. We recommend distributing multiple doses of standard IM or IN naloxone to bystanders and educating individuals on the adequacy of two doses in reversing fentanyl overdoses. Individuals should continue administration until the recipient is revived, ensuring appropriate intervals between each dose along with rescue breaths, and calling emergency medical services if the individual is unresponsive after two doses. We do not recommend high-dose naloxone formulations as a substitute for four doses of IM or IN naloxone due to the higher cost, risk of precipitated withdrawal, and limited evidence compared to standard doses. Future research must take into consideration lived and living experience, scientific evidence, conflicts of interest, and the bodily autonomy of people who use drugs.

Understanding the barriers and facilitators to implementing and sustaining Mobile Overdose Response Services from the perspective of Canadian key interest groups: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Unregulated supply of fentanyl and adulterants continues to drive the overdose crisis. Mobile Overdose Response Services (MORS) are novel technologies that offer virtual supervised consumption to minimize the risk of fatal overdose for those who are unable to access other forms of harm reduction. However, as newly implemented services, they are also faced with numerous limitations. The aim of this study was to examine the facilitators and barriers to the adoption of MORS in Canada. METHODS: A total of 64 semi-structured interviews were conducted between November 2021 and April 2022. Participants consisted of people who use substances (PWUS), family members of PWUS, health care professionals, harm reduction workers, MORS operators, and members of the general public. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify the major themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Respondents revealed that MORS facilitated a safe, anonymous, and nonjudgmental environment for PWUS to seek harm reduction and other necessary support. It also created a new sense of purpose for operators to positively contribute to the community. Further advertising and promotional efforts were deemed important to increase its awareness. However, barriers to MORS implementation included concerns regarding privacy/confidentiality, uncertainty of funding, and compassion fatigue among the operators. CONCLUSION: Although MORS were generally viewed as a useful addition to the currently existing harm reduction services, it's important to monitor and tackle these barriers by engaging the perspectives of key interest groups.

Using alone at home: What's missing in housing-based responses to the overdose crisis?

BACKGROUND: Against the backdrop of North America's overdose crisis, most overdose deaths are occurring in housing environments, largely due to individuals using drugs alone. Overdose deaths in cities remain concentrated in marginal housing environments (e.g., single-room occupancy housing, shelters), which are often the only forms of housing available to urban poor and drug-using communities. This commentary aims to highlight current housing-based overdose prevention interventions and to situate them within the broader environmental contexts of marginal housing. In doing so, we call attention to the need to better understand marginal housing as sites of overdose vulnerability and public health intervention to optimize responses to the overdose crisis. HARM REDUCTION AND OVERDOSE PREVENTION IN HOUSING: In response to high overdose rates in marginal housing environments several interventions (e.g., housing-based supervised consumption rooms, peer-witnessed injection) have recently been implemented in select jurisdictions. However, even with the growing recognition of marginal housing as a key intervention site, housing-based interventions have yet to be scaled up in a meaningful way. Further, there have been persistent challenges to tailoring these approaches to address dynamics within housing environments. Thus, while it is critical to expand coverage of housing-based interventions across marginal housing environments, these interventions must also attend to the contextual drivers of risks in these settings to best foster enabling environments for harm reduction and maximize impacts. CONCLUSION: Emerging housing-focused interventions are designed to address key drivers of overdose risk (e.g., using alone, toxic drug supply). Yet, broader contextual factors (e.g., drug criminalization, housing quality, gender) are equally critical factors that shape how structurally vulnerable people who use drugs navigate and engage with harm reduction interventions. A more comprehensive understanding of these contextual factors within housing environments is needed to inform policy and programmatic interventions that are responsive to the needs of people who use drugs in these settings.

Testing the test strips: laboratory performance of fentanyl test strips.

BACKGROUND: The overdose crisis driven by synthetic opioids continues to escalate in the USA. We evaluated the efficacy of multiple manufacturing lots of a fentanyl test strip (FTS) to detect fentanyl and fentanyl analogs and assessed cross-reactivity with possible interferences. METHODS: Drug standards were dissolved in water in a laboratory setting and serially diluted. Drug dilutions were tested using five different manufacturing lots of BTNX Rapid Response (20 ng/mL cutoff) lateral flow chromatographic immunoassay strips to assess lot-to-lot variability for FTS sensitivity and cross-reactivity for the analytes of interest. RESULTS: All five manufacturing lots cross-reacted with fentanyl and eleven fentanyl analogs. Diphenhydramine, lidocaine, MDMA, and methamphetamine were found to cause false positives with the strips. There was notable lot-to-lot variability in the sensitivity of the strips for fentanyl, fentanyl analogs, and known interferences. DISCUSSION: FTS remains an important overdose prevention tool, but lot-to-lot variability in performance complicates robust instructions that balance the prevention of false positives and false negatives. Continued lot-to-lot performance assessment is recommended to ensure health education for FTS remains accurate. More sophisticated drug checking technologies and services are needed in the community landscape to augment personal FTS use to facilitate informed consumption and overdose risk mitigation.

Recommendations from people who use drugs in Philadelphia, PA about structuring point-of-care drug checking.

BACKGROUND: Adulterants, such as fentanyl and xylazine, among others, are present in a high percentage of the illicit drug supply, increasing the risk for overdose and other adverse health events among people who use drugs (PWUD). Point-of-care drug checking identifies components of a drug sample and delivers results consumers. To successfully meet the diverse needs of PWUD, more information is needed about the utility of drug checking, motivations for using services contextualized in broader comments on the drug supply, hypothesized actions to be taken after receiving drug checking results, and the ideal structure of a program. METHODS: In December 2021, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 40 PWUD who were accessing harm reduction services in Philadelphia, PA. Participants were asked about opinions and preferences for a future drug checking program. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and coded using content analysis to identify themes. RESULTS: Participants were primarily White (52.5%) and male (60%). Heroin/fentanyl was the most frequently reported drug used (72.5%, n = 29), followed by crack cocaine (60.0%, n = 24) and powder cocaine (47.5%, n = 19). Emerging themes from potential drug checking consumers included universal interest in using a drug checking program, intentions to change drug use actions based on drug checking results, deep concern about the unpredictability of the drug supply, engaging in multiple harm reduction practices, and concerns about privacy while accessing a service. CONCLUSIONS: We offer recommendations for sites considering point-of-care drug checking regarding staffing, safety, logistics, and cultural competency. Programs should leverage pre-existing relationships with organizations serving PWUD and hire people with lived experiences of drug use. They should work with local or state government to issue protections to people accessing drug checking programs and ensure the service is anonymous and that data collection is minimized to keep the program low-threshold. Programs will ideally operate in multiple locations and span "atmosphere" (e.g., from clinical to a drop-in culture), offer in-depth education to participants about results, engage with a community advisory board, and not partner with law enforcement.

An evaluation of first responders' intention to refer to post-overdose services following SHIELD training.

BACKGROUND: First responders [law enforcement officers (LEO) and Fire/Emergency Medical Services (EMS)] can play a vital prevention role, connecting overdose survivors to treatment and recovery services. This study was conducted to examine the effect of occupational safety and harm reduction training on first responders' intention to refer overdose survivors to treatment, syringe service, naloxone distribution, social support, and care-coordination services, and whether those intentions differed by first responder profession. METHODS: First responders in Missouri were trained using the Safety and Health Integration in the Enforcement of Laws on Drugs (SHIELD) model. Trainees' intent to refer (ITR) overdose survivors to prevention and supportive services was assessed pre- and post-training (1-5 scale). A mixed model analysis was conducted to assess change in mean ITR scores between pre- and post-training, and between profession type, while adjusting for random effects between individual trainees and baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Between December 2020 and January 2023, 742 first responders completed pre- and post-training surveys. SHIELD training was associated with higher first responders' intentions to refer, with ITR to naloxone distribution (1.83-3.88) and syringe exchange (1.73-3.69) demonstrating the greatest changes, and drug treatment (2.94-3.95) having the least change. There was a significant increase in ITR score from pre- to post-test (ß = 2.15; 95% CI 1.99, 2.30), and LEO-relative to Fire/EMS-had a higher score at pre-test (0.509; 95% CI 0.367, 0.651) but a lower score at post-test (0.148; 95% CI - 0.004, 0.300). CONCLUSION: Training bundling occupational safety with harm reduction content is immediately effective at increasing first responders' intention to connect overdose survivors to community substance use services. When provided with the rationale and instruction to execute referrals, first responders are amenable, and their positive response highlights the opportunity for growth in increasing referral partnerships and collaborations. Further research is necessary to assess the extent to which ITR translates to referral behavior in the field.

Overdose responses among rural people who use drugs: A multi-regional qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to distribute naloxone have equipped more people with the ability to reverse opioid overdoses but people who use drugs are often reluctant to call 911 due to concerns for legal repercussions. Rural communities face unique challenges in reducing overdose deaths compared to urban communities, including limited access to harm reduction services as well as greater concerns about stigma and privacy. METHODS: The Rural Opioid Initiative was funded in 2017 to better understand the health-related harms associated with the opioid crisis in rural US communities and consists of eight studies spanning ten states and 65 counties. Each study conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with people who use drugs to understand contextual factors influencing drug use and health behaviors. We analyzed qualitative data from seven studies with data available at the time of analysis to understand peer response to overdose. RESULTS: Of the 304 participants interviewed, 55% were men, 70% were white, 80% reported current injection drug use, and 60% reported methamphetamine use. Similar to what has been found in studies focused on urban settings, people who use drugs in rural communities use a range of strategies to reverse overdoses, including non-evidence-based approaches. Several reported that multiple doses of naloxone are needed to reverse overdose. Three themes emerged around the willingness to call 911, including (1) hesitancy to call 911 for fear of legal consequences, (2) negative perceptions or experiences with law enforcement officers, and (3) efforts to obtain medical intervention while avoiding identification/law enforcement involvement. CONCLUSION: People who use drugs employ multiple strategies to attempt overdose reversal, including non-evidence-based approaches. Greater education about the most effective and least harmful strategies is needed. Reluctance to call 911 is rooted in concerns about potential legal consequences as well as perceptions about law enforcement officers, which may be heightened in rural communities where people who use drugs are more easily identified by law enforcement. People who use drugs will go to great strides to connect their peers to needed medical services, suggesting that comprehensive interventions to reduce interactions with law enforcement officers and eliminate legal consequences for reporting overdoses are critical.

"If it wasn't for them, I don't think I would be here": experiences of the first year of a safer supply program during the dual public health emergencies of COVID-19 and the drug toxicity crisis.

BACKGROUND: In response to the devastating drug toxicity crisis in Canada driven by an unregulated opioid supply predominantly composed of fentanyl and analogues, safer supply programs have been introduced. These programs provide people using street-acquired opioids with prescribed, pharmaceutical opioids. We use six core components of safer supply programs identified by people who use drugs to explore participant perspectives on the first year of operations of a safer supply program in Victoria, BC, during the dual public health emergencies of COVID-19 and the drug toxicity crisis to examine whether the program met drug-user defined elements of an effective safer supply model. METHODS: This study used a community-based participatory research approach to ensure that the research was reflective of community concerns and priorities, rather than being extractive. We interviewed 16 safer supply program participants between December 2020 and June 2021. Analysis was structured using the six core components of effective safer supply from the perspective of people who use drugs, generated through a prior study. RESULTS: Ensuring access to the 'right dose and right drugs' of medications was crucial, with many participants reporting success with the available pharmaceutical options. However, others highlighted issues with the strength of the available medications and the lack of options for smokeable medications. Accessing the safer supply program allowed participants to reduce their use of drugs from unregulated markets and manage withdrawal, pain and cravings. On components related to program operations, participants reported receiving compassionate care, and that accessing the safer supply program was a non-stigmatizing experience. They also reported receiving support to find housing, access food, obtain ID, and other needs. However, participants worried about long term program sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: Participants in the safer supply program overwhelmingly appreciated it and felt it was lifesaving, and unlike other healthcare or treatment services they had previously accessed. Participants raised concerns that unless a wider variety of medications and ability to consume them by multiple routes of administration became available, safer supply programs would remain unable to completely replace substances from unregulated markets.

How do we understand the value of drug checking as a component of harm reduction services? A qualitative exploration of client and provider perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Mortality related to opioid overdose in the U.S. has risen sharply in the past decade. In California, opioid overdose death rates more than tripled from 2018 to 2021, and deaths from synthetic opioids such as fentanyl increased more than seven times in those three years alone. Heightened attention to this crisis has attracted funding and programming opportunities for prevention and harm reduction interventions. Drug checking services offer people who use drugs the opportunity to test the chemical content of their own supply, but are not widely used in North America. We report on qualitative data from providers and clients of harm reduction and drug checking services, to explore how these services are used, experienced, and considered. METHODS: We conducted in-depth semi-structured key informant interviews across two samples of drug checking stakeholders: "clients" (individuals who use drugs and receive harm reduction services) and "providers" (subject matter experts and those providing clinical and harm reduction services to people who use drugs). Provider interviews were conducted via Zoom from June-November, 2022. Client interviews were conducted in person in San Francisco over a one-week period in November 2022. Data were analyzed following the tenets of thematic analysis. RESULTS: We found that the value of drug checking includes but extends well beyond overdose prevention. Participants discussed ways that drug checking can fill a regulatory vacuum, serve as a tool of informal market regulation at the community level, and empower public health surveillance systems and clinical response. We present our findings within three key themes: (1) the role of drug checking in overdose prevention; (2) benefits to the overall agency, health, and wellbeing of people who use drugs; and (3) impacts of drug checking services at the community and systems levels. CONCLUSION: This study contributes to growing evidence of the effectiveness of drug checking services in mitigating risks associated with substance use, including overdose, through enabling people who use and sell drugs to test their own supply. It further contributes to discussions around the utility of drug checking and harm reduction, in order to inform legislation and funding allocation.

Association between willingness to use an overdose prevention center and probation or parole status among people who use drugs in Rhode Island.

BACKGROUND: Overdose prevention centers (OPCs) are being implemented in the United States as a strategy to reduce drug-related mortality and morbidity. Previous studies have suggested that people who use drugs (PWUD) with a history of criminal legal system (CLS) involvement (e.g. current probation/parole) are at greater risk of overdose but may also encounter significant barriers to OPC use. The objective of this study was to explore the association between willingness to use an OPC and probation/parole status in a sample of PWUD in Rhode Island. METHODS: This study utilized data from the Rhode Island Prescription and Illicit Drug Study, which enrolled adult PWUD from August 2020 to February 2023. We used Pearson's chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to assess bivariate associations between willingness to use an OPC and probation/parole status (current/previous/never), as well as other sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics. In multivariable Poisson analyses, we examined the association between willingness to use an OPC and probation/parole status, adjusting for key sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics. RESULTS: Among 482 study participants, 67% were male, 56% identified as white, 20% identified as Hispanic/Latine, and the median age was 43 (IQR 35-53). Nearly a quarter (24%) had never been on probation/parole, 44% were not currently on probation/parole but had a lifetime history of probation and parole, and 32% were currently on probation/parole. Most participants (71%) reported willingness to use an OPC, and in both bivariate and multivariable analyses, willingness to use an OPC did not vary by probation/parole status. Crack cocaine use and lifetime non-fatal overdose were associated with greater willingness to use an OPC (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate high willingness to use OPC among PWUD in Rhode Island regardless of CLS-involvement. As OPCs begin to be implemented in Rhode Island, it will be imperative to engage people with CLS-involvement and to ensure access to the OPC and protection against re-incarceration due to potential barriers, such as police surveillance of OPCs.

Using qualitative system dynamics modeling to understand overdose bystander behavior in the context of Connecticut's Good Samaritan Laws and identify effective policy options.

BACKGROUND: Good Samaritan Laws are a harm reduction policy intended to facilitate a reduction in fatal opioid overdoses by enabling bystanders, first responders, and health care providers to assist individuals experiencing an overdose without facing civil or criminal liability. However, Good Samaritan Laws may not be reaching their full impact in many communities due to a lack of knowledge of protections under these laws, distrust in law enforcement, and fear of legal consequences among potential bystanders. The purpose of this study was to develop a systems-level understanding of the factors influencing bystander responses to opioid overdose in the context of Connecticut's Good Samaritan Laws and identify high-leverage policies for improving opioid-related outcomes and implementation of these laws in Connecticut (CT). METHODS: We conducted six group model building (GMB) workshops that engaged a diverse set of participants with medical and community expertise and lived bystander experience. Through an iterative, stakeholder-engaged process, we developed, refined, and validated a qualitative system dynamics (SD) model in the form of a causal loop diagram (CLD). RESULTS: Our resulting qualitative SD model captures our GMB participants' collective understanding of the dynamics driving bystander behavior and other factors influencing the effectiveness of Good Samaritan Laws in the state of CT. In this model, we identified seven balancing (B) and eight reinforcing (R) feedback loops within four narrative domains: Narrative 1 - Overdose, Calling 911, and First Responder Burnout; Narrative 2 - Naloxone Use, Acceptability, and Linking Patients to Services; Narrative 3 - Drug Arrests, Belief in Good Samaritan Laws, and Community Trust in Police; and Narrative 4 - Bystander Naloxone Use, Community Participation in Harm Reduction, and Cultural Change Towards Carrying Naloxone. CONCLUSIONS: Our qualitative SD model brings a nuanced systems perspective to the literature on bystander behavior in the context of Good Samaritan Laws. Our model, grounded in local knowledge and experience, shows how the hypothesized non-linear interdependencies of the social, structural, and policy determinants of bystander behavior collectively form endogenous feedback loops that can be leveraged to design policies to advance and sustain systems change.

Substance use patterns, sociodemographics, and health profiles of harm reduction service recipients in Burlington, Vermont.

BACKGROUND: Understanding current substance use practices is critical to reduce and prevent overdose deaths among individuals at increased risk including persons who use and inject drugs. Because individuals participating in harm reduction and syringe service programs are actively using drugs and vary in treatment participation, information on their current drug use and preferred drugs provides a unique window into the drug use ecology of communities that can inform future intervention services and treatment provision. METHODS: Between March and June 2023, 150 participants in a harm reduction program in Burlington, Vermont completed a survey examining sociodemographics; treatment and medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) status; substance use; injection information; overdose information; and mental health, medical, and health information. Descriptive analyses assessed overall findings. Comparisons between primary drug subgroups (stimulants, opioids, stimulants-opioids) of past-three-month drug use and treatment participation were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Most participants reported being unhoused or unstable housing (80.7%) and unemployed (64.0%) or on disability (21.3%). The drug with the greatest proportion of participants reporting past three-month use was crack cocaine (83.3%). Fentanyl use was reported by 69.3% of participants and xylazine by 38.0% of participants. High rates of stimulant use were reported across all participants independent of whether stimulants were a participant's primary drug. Fentanyl, heroin, and xylazine use was less common in the stimulants subgroup compared to opioid-containing subgroups (p < .001). Current- and past-year MOUD treatment was reported by 58.0% and 77.3% of participants. Emergency rooms were the most common past-year medical treatment location (48.7%; M = 2.72 visits). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate high rates of polysubstance use and the underrecognized effects of stimulant use among people who use drugs-including its notable and increasing role in drug-overdose deaths. Crack cocaine was the most used stimulant, a geographical difference from much of the US where methamphetamine is most common. With the increasing prevalence of fentanyl-adulterated stimulants and differences in opioid use observed between subgroups, these findings highlight the importance and necessity of harm reduction interventions (e.g., drug checking services, fentanyl test strips) and effective treatment for individuals using stimulants alongside MOUD treatment.

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.

Prescription Opioid Diversion Sources Among African Americans: Implications for Overdose Prevention.

Recent data show that African Americans (AAs) experienced a greater increase in overdose deaths involving prescription opioids relative to other racial/ethnic groups. One possible mechanism through which elevated risk for overdose is conferred to AAs could be due to greater exposure to contaminated counterfeit pills. Unfortunately, prescription opioid diversion is understudied among AAs and less is known regarding which sources AAs use to access pharmaceutical opioids. The objective of this study, therefore, was to identify and describe the most commonly used diversion sources for prescription opioids among AAs. Qualitative interview data are also presented to contextualize the most prevalent sources. This study used data from the Florida Minority Health Study, a mixed-methods project that included online surveys (n = 303) and qualitative in-depth interviews (n = 30) of AAs. Data collection was conducted from August 2021 to February 2022 throughout Southwest Florida. Analyses revealed that the most widely used sources for prescription opioids were dealers (33.0%) and friends/relatives (34.7%). Additionally, interview data indicated that dealers are the access point where larger volume acquisitions are made and high potency formulations are accessed. These findings suggest that AAs may utilize nonhealthcare related sources at higher rates than healthcare related sources to acquire prescription opioids. This is concerning because opioid pills acquired through nonhealthcare related sources are especially susceptible to fentanyl adulteration. These findings invite further study using nationally representative data to determine if AAs disproportionately use nonhealthcare related sources compared to persons from other racial/ethnic groups.

"I Don't Go Overboard": Perceptions of Overdose Risk and Risk Reduction Strategies among People Who Use Drugs in Rhode Island.

Background: North America experiencing an unprecedented overdose epidemic, with data estimating almost 110,000 overdose deaths occurring in 2022 in the United States (US). To address fatal overdoses in the US, community organizations and local health departments in some jurisdictions have expanded community distribution of naloxone, and increased overdose prevention education, and other harm reduction supplies and services (e.g., fentanyl test strips, drug checking programs) to reduce harm for people who use drugs (PWUD). Objectives: Understanding how PWUD manage overdose risk within the context of these expanded services is important for ensuring public health services are meeting their needs. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 25 PWUD who were accessing harm reduction services in Rhode Island. Data were imported into NVivo where they were coded and analyzed thematically. Results: Our findings demonstrate the complexity of managing overdose risk in the context of a fentanyl drug supply. While most participants were concerned about overdosing, they sought to manage overdose risk through their own harm reduction practices (e.g., testing their drugs, going slow) and drug purchasing dynamics, even when using alone. Conclusions: Study findings point to the need to implement and scale-up community-level interventions to better support PWUD within the context of the current US overdose crisis.

Hemoadsorption Therapy for Calcium Channel Blocker Overdose: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Modern resin hemoadsorption/hemoperfusion for calcium channel blocker overdose is yet to be reported. The characteristics of calcium channel blockers make them unamenable to removal by hemodiafiltration or charcoal hemoperfusion; however, elimination, using styrene bead adsorption in an ex vivo model, has been demonstrated. Its clinical use is described. CASE REPORT: A man in his 20s was admitted with shock into the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) after an overdose of amlodipine and risperidone. Resuscitation and supportive care were administered, but hypotension did not resolve despite the administration of intravenous fluids, infusions of calcium, adrenaline, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic therapy. Methylene blue was then administered to maintain the mean arterial pressures. However, the hemodynamic effect did not allow the weaning of the adrenaline. Drug clearance using hemoadsorption/hemoperfusion was attempted using a styrene resin filter (Jafron HA230; Jafron Biomedical Co., Ltd., Guangdong, China). During the two hemoperfusion sessions (6 h duration each, and 18 h apart) the patient had successfully weaned off all supportive measures, with lactate levels returning to normal and was later discharged home. At the end of each session, significant amlodipine concentrations were detected in blood aspirated from both filters, suggesting enhanced clearance. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Our case illustrates a temporal relationship between resin hemoperfusion therapy, resolution of hemodynamic instability, and shock without proving causation. Significant amlodipine elimination was suggested by high concentrations found in blood from the filter. At the same time, shock resolution after initiation of hemoperfusion occurred in less than one elimination half-life of amlodipine.