"Everything is kind of the same except my mind is with me": exploring cannabis substitution in a sample of adults in early recovery from an opioid or stimulant addiction.

BACKGROUND: Recovery from addiction is frequently equated with abstinence. However, some individuals who resolve an addiction continue to use substances, including via substitution (i.e., increased use of one substance after eliminating/ reducing another). Substitution may play a distinct role during early recovery (≤ 1 year), as this period is marked by dramatic change and adjustment. Cannabis is one of the most used substances and is legal for medical and recreational use in an increasing number of states. Consequently, cannabis an increasingly accessible substitute for substances, like fentanyl, heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine, with higher risk profiles (e.g., associated with risk for withdrawal, overdose, and incarceration). METHODS: Fourteen participants reported that they had resolved a primary opioid or stimulant addiction and subsequently increased their cannabis use within the previous 12 months. Using grounded theory, the interviewer explored their experiences of cannabis use during early recovery. Data were analyzed in three stages: line by line coding for all text related to cannabis use and recovery, focused coding, and axial coding to generate a theory about recovery with cannabis substitution. The motivational model of substance use provided sensitizing concepts. RESULTS & DISCUSSION: The final sample included eight men and six women ranging in age from 20 to 50 years old. Three participants resolved an addiction to methamphetamine and the remaining 11, an addiction to opioids. Participants explained that cannabis was appealing because of its less harmful profile (e.g., no overdose risk, safe supply, few side effects). Participants' primary motives for cannabis use included mitigation of psychiatric symptoms, withdrawal/ cravings, and boredom. While cannabis was effective toward these ends, participants also reported some negative side effects (e.g., decreased productivity, social anxiety). All participants described typical benefits of recovery (e.g., improved self-concept, better relationships) while continuing to use cannabis. Their experiences with and beliefs about substitution suggest it can be an effective strategy for some individuals during early recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis use may benefit some adults who are reducing their opioid or stimulant use, especially during early recovery. The addiction field's focus on abstinence has limited our knowledge about non-abstinent recovery. Longitudinal studies are needed to understand the nature of substitution and its impact on recovery over time.

"I don't think of it as a shelter. I say I'm going home": a qualitative evaluation of a low-threshold shelter for women who use drugs.

BACKGROUND: In 2021-2022, encampments in a downtown Boston neighborhood reached record heights, increasing the visibility of drug use and homelessness in the city. In response, the city planned a "sweep" (i.e., eradication of encampments) and requested support from social services and medical providers to pilot low-threshold shelters. Low-threshold shelters reduce barriers to staying in traditional congregate shelters with more flexible regulations, longer-term bed assignments, and secured storage for contraband (e.g., drugs, weapons) instead of forced disposal. One homeless service provider opened a harm reduction-focused shelter for women who use drugs. This report describes the low-threshold shelter design and program evaluation. METHODS: This program evaluation had two primary aims: (1) to examine guests' beliefs about shelter policies and practices; and (2) to understand the staff's experiences working in a low-threshold model. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 16 guests and 12 staff members during the summer 2022. Interviews were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Guests expressed overwhelming approval for the shelter's policies, which they stated supported their autonomy, dignity, and safety. They emphasized the staff's willingness to build relationships, thus demonstrating true commitment to the guests. Guests highlighted the value of daytime access to the shelter, as it granted them autonomy over their time, reduced their substance use, and helped them build relationships with staff and other guests. The co-directors and staff designed the shelter quickly and without US models for reference; they turned to international literature, local harm reduction health care providers, and women living in encampments for guidance on the shelter policies. The staff were passionate and committed to the health and stability of the guests. Most staff found value in the low-threshold model, though some were challenged by it, believing it enabled drug use and did not require the guests to "get better." CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation indicates the value of low-threshold, harm reduction shelters as alternatives to traditional models. While these shelters do not mitigate the need for overarching housing reform, they are important measures to meet the needs of women experiencing unsheltered homelessness who face intersectional oppression.

Privacy and confidentiality in Massachusetts' post-overdose outreach programs: Mixed methods analysis of outreach staff surveys and interviews.

BACKGROUND: Public health-public safety partnerships for post-overdose outreach have emerged in many communities to prevent future overdose events. These efforts often identify overdose survivors through emergency call data and seek to link them with relevant services. The aim of this study was to describe how post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts manage the confidentiality of identifiable information and privacy of survivors. METHODS: In 2019, 138 Massachusetts programs completed surveys eliciting responses to questions about program operations. Descriptive statistics were calculated from the closed-ended survey responses. Thirty-eight interviews were conducted among outreach staff members during 2019-2020. Interview transcripts and open-ended survey responses were thematically analyzed using deductive and inductive approaches. RESULTS: Of programs that completed the survey, 90 % (n = 124/138) reported acting to protect the privacy of survivors following overdose events, and 84 % (n = 114/135) reported implementing a protocol to maintain the confidentiality of personal information. Interviews with outreach team members indicated substantial variation in practice. Outreach programs regularly employed discretion in determining actions in the field, sometimes undermining survivor privacy and confidentiality (e.g., by disclosing the overdose event to family members). Programs aiming to prioritize privacy and confidentiality attempted to make initial contact with survivors by phone, limited or concealed materials left behind when no one was home, and/or limited the number of contact attempts. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the establishment of privacy and confidentiality protocols within most post-overdose outreach programs, application of these procedures was varied, discretionary, and at times viewed by staff as competing with engagement efforts. Individual outreach overdose teams should prioritize privacy and confidentiality during outreach to protect overdose survivors from undesired exposure. In addition to individual program changes, access to overdose survivor information could be changed across all programs to bolster privacy and confidentiality protocols. For example, transitioning the management of overdose-related information to non-law enforcement agencies would limit officers' ability to disseminate such information at their discretion.

Enhancing behavioral health competencies for senior center staff through workforce development and training.

Increases in the numbers of older adults with mental health and substance use concerns compel us to identify best practices in training to address these issues. Senior Centers are an ideal location for behavioral health education programs as they are the go-to place for many older adults. This paper describes an online certificate program in Behavioral Health and Aging offered by the Center for Aging and Disability Education and Research at Boston University School of Social Work in collaboration with the National Council on Aging to increase senior center staff knowledge and skills. A total of 228 senior center staff in Illinois, Florida, and Wisconsin completed the online certificate program. There were statistically significant changes in key competencies for all courses based on pre-post assessment. We held key informant interviews to assess the impact of training and participants stated that their knowledge, skills, and behaviors were influenced by the program.

Abrupt Discontinuation From Long-Term Opioid Therapy in Massachusetts, 2015-2018.

INTRODUCTION: In response to the opioid overdose crisis, providers were urged to taper and discontinue patients from long-term opioid therapy; however, abrupt discontinuation may lead to poor health outcomes. This study aims to determine abrupt and tapered discontinuation rates and identify the patient and provider characteristics associated with abrupt discontinuation. METHODS: Data were from the Massachusetts Prescription Monitoring Program, 2015-2018. Patients discontinued from long-term opioid therapy were included in the analysis. Differences between abrupt and tapered discontinuations were identified with bivariate correlations, and variables independently associated with abrupt discontinuation were identified using multivariable Poisson regression analyses. Data were analyzed during 2019-2021. RESULTS: In total, 277,485 patients experienced 359,320 discontinuations, of which 33.7% (n=120,964) were abrupt. Of all discontinuations, 55.7% were among female patients, and 57.9% were among patients aged >55 years. The ratio of abrupt to tapered discontinuations increased from 1:2.11 in 2015 to 1:1.75 in 2018. In bivariate analysis, prescribers with more patients receiving monthly opioid prescriptions were less likely to abruptly discontinue patients (29.0, IQR=13.9, 55.3 vs 18.8, IQR=5.84, 43.9, p<0.001), as were prescribers who wrote more monthly opioid prescriptions (36.0, IQR=16.8, 70.8 vs 25.4, IQR=7.40, 58.3, p<0.001). Multivariable results indicated that abrupt discontinuation was independently associated with male sex (RR=1.31, 95% CI=1.29, 1.1.32), younger age (RR=0.872, 95% CI=0.869, 0.874), greater distance between patient and prescriber (RR=1.0075, 95% CI=1.0072, 1.0078), and longer long-term opioid therapy duration (RR=1.021, 95% CI=1.021, 1.0122 for every month increase). CONCLUSIONS: Among all long-term opioid therapy discontinuations, abrupt discontinuation is increasing. Evidence-based approaches to managing and tapering long-term opioid therapy are urgently needed.