Wastewater surveillance for COVID-19 in shelters: A creative strategy for a complex setting.

People experiencing homelessness experience disproportionate rates of morbidity and mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to the general population and shelters for people experiencing homelessness are a major contributing factor to these negative outcomes. As a result of their unique structure, population and physical space, these settings pose several challenges to the prevention of COVID-19 infection that are not adequately addressed by conventional non-pharmaceutical public health interventions. Wastewater surveillance for COVID-19 is a viable strategy for health protection in shelters due to its ability to meet these unique challenges. Its passive nature does not depend on individual health-seeking behaviours, and it can provide useful epidemiological information early on in an outbreak setting. In this commentary, the authors examine a recent application of wastewater surveillance of COVID-19 in a men's shelter in Toronto. Further applications of wastewater surveillance for other infectious diseases of concern in shelters are proposed, and the need for the development of ethical frameworks governing the use of this technology is discussed.

"We are not invited": Australian focus group results on how to improve ethnic diversity in trials.

OBJECTIVE: Lack of ethnic diversity in trials may contribute to health disparities and to inequity in health outcomes. The primary objective was to investigate the experiences and perspectives of ethnically diverse populations about how to improve ethnic diversity in trials. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative data were collected via 16 focus groups with participants from 21 ethnically diverse communities in Australia. Data collection took place between August and September 2022 in community-based settings in six capital cities: Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, Adelaide, Brisbane, and Darwin and one rural town: Bordertown (South Australia). RESULTS: One hundred and fifty eight purposively sampled adults (aged 18-85, 49% women), participated in groups speaking Tamil, Greek, Punjabi, Italian, Mandarin, Cantonese, Karin, Vietnamese, Nepalese, and Arabic; or English-language groups (comprising Fijian, Filipino, African, and 2 multicultural groups). Only 10 participants had previously taken part in medical research including three in trials. There was support for medical research, including trials, however, most participants had never been invited to participate. To increase ethnic diversity in trial populations, participants recommended recruitment via partnering with communities, translating trial materials and making them culturally accessible using audiovisual ways, promoting retention by minimizing participant burden, establishing trust and rapport between participants and researchers, and sharing individual results. Participants were reluctant to join studies on taboo topics in their communities (e.g., sexual health) or in which physical specimens (e.g., blood) were needed. Participants said these barriers could be mitigated by communicating about the topic in more culturally cognizant and safe ways, explaining how data would be securely stored, and reinforcing the benefit of medical research to humanity. CONCLUSION: Participants recognized the principal benefits of trials and other medical research, were prepared to take part, and offered suggestions on recruitment, consent, data collection mechanisms, and retention to enable this to occur. Researchers should consider these community insights when designing and conducting trials; and government, regulators, funders, and publishers should allow for greater innovation and flexibility in their processes to enable ethnic diversity in trials to improve.

Factors associated with frequent buprenorphine / naloxone initiation in a national survey of Canadian emergency physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To identify individual and site-related factors associated with frequent emergency department (ED) buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP) initiation. BUP initiation, an effective opioid use disorder (OUD) intervention, varies widely across Canadian EDs. METHODS: We surveyed emergency physicians in 6 Canadian provinces from 2018 to 2019 using bilingual paper and web-based questionnaires. Survey domains included BUP-related practice, demographics, attitudes toward BUP, and site characteristics. We defined frequent BUP initiation (the primary outcome) as at least once per month, high OUD prevalence as at least one OUD patient per shift, and high OUD resources as at least 3 out of the following 5 resources: BUP initiation pathways, BUP in ED, peer navigators, accessible addiction specialists, and accessible follow-up clinics. We excluded responses from sites with <50% participation (to minimize non-responder bias) and those missing the primary outcome. We used univariate analysis to identify associations between frequent BUP initiation and factors of interest, stratifying by OUD prevalence. RESULTS: We excluded 3 responses for missing BUP initiation frequency and 9 for low response rate at one ED. Of the remaining 649 respondents from 34 EDs, 374 (58%) practiced in metropolitan areas, 384 (59%) reported high OUD prevalence, 312 (48%) had high OUD resources, and 161 (25%) initiated BUP frequently. Age, gender, board certification and years in practice were not associated with frequent BUP initiation. Site-specific factors were associated with frequent BUP initiation (high OUD resources [OR 6.91], high OUD prevalence [OR 4.45], and metropolitan location [OR 2.39],) as were individual attitudinal factors (willingness, confidence, and responsibility to initiate BUP.) Similar associations persisted in the high OUD prevalence subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Individual attitudinal and site-specific factors were associated with frequent BUP initiation. Training to increase physician confidence and increasing OUD resources could increase BUP initiation and benefit ED patients with OUD.

An emergency-department-initiated outreach program for patients with opioid use disorder is associated with an increase in agonist therapy and engagement in addictions care: a one-year cohort study.

BACKGROUND: People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are high-risk for short-term mortality and morbidity. Emergency department (ED) interventions can reduce those risks, but benefits wane without ongoing community follow-up. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an ED-based intensive community outreach program. METHODS: At two urban EDs between October 2019 and March 2020, we enrolled patients with OUD not currently on opioid agonist therapy (OAT) in a prospective cohort study evaluating a one-year intensive community outreach program, which provided ongoing addictions care, housing resources, and community support. We surveyed patients at intake and at scheduled outreach encounters at one, two, six, and twelve months. Follow-up surveys assessed OAT uptake, addictions care engagement, housing status, quality of life scores, illicit opioid use, and outreach helpfulness. We used descriptive statistics for each period and conducted sensitivity and subgroup analyses to account for missing data. RESULTS: Of 84 baseline participants, 29% were female and 32% were housed, with a median age of 33. Sixty participants (71%) completed at least one follow-up survey. Survey completion rates were 37%, 38%, 39%, and 40% respectively at one, two, six, and twelve months. Participants had a median of three outreach encounters. Among respondents, OAT was 0% at enrolment and ranged from 38% to 56% at follow-up; addictions care engagement was 22% at enrolment and ranged from 65% to 81% during follow-up; and housing was 40% at enrolment and ranged from 48% to 59% during follow-up. Improvements from baseline to follow-up occurred for all time periods. OAT and engagement in care benefits were maintained in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Respondents rated the outreach program as helpful at all time periods, CONCLUSION: An ED-initiated intensive outreach program for patients with OUD not yet on OAT was associated with a persistent increase in OAT use and engagement in care, as well as housing.

Opioid-related overdose deaths among people experiencing homelessness, 2017 to 2021: A population-based analysis using coroner and health administrative data from Ontario, Canada.

AIMS: To measure the change in proportion of opioid-related overdose deaths attributed to people experiencing homelessness and to compare the opioid-related fatalities between individuals experiencing homelessness and not experiencing homelessness at time of death. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Population-based, time-trend analysis using coroner and health administrative databases from Ontario, Canada from 1 July 2017 and 30 June 2021. MEASUREMENTS: Quarterly proportion of opioid-related overdose deaths attributed to people experiencing homelessness. We also obtained socio-demographic and health characteristics of decedents, health-care encounters preceding death, substances directly contributing to death and circumstances surrounding deaths. FINDINGS: A total of 6644 individuals (median age = 40 years, interquartile range = 31-51; 74.1% male) experienced an accidental opioid-related overdose death, among whom 884 (13.3%) were identified as experiencing homelessness at the time of death. The quarterly proportion of opioid-related overdose deaths attributed to people experiencing homelessness increased from 7.2% (26/359) in July-September 2017 to 16.8% (97/578) by April-June 2021 (trend test P < 0.01). Compared with housed decedents, those experiencing homelessness were younger (61.3 versus 53.1% aged 25-44), had higher prevalence of mental health or substance use disorders (77.1 versus 67.1%) and more often visited hospitals (32.1 versus 24.5%) and emergency departments (82.6 versus 68.5%) in the year prior to death. Fentanyl and its analogues more often directly contributed to death among people experiencing homelessness (94.0 versus 81.4%), as did stimulants (67.4 versus 51.6%); in contrast, methadone was less often present (7.8 versus 12.4%). Individuals experiencing homelessness were more often in the presence of a bystander during the acute toxicity event that led to death (55.8 versus 49.7%); and where another individual was present, more often had a resuscitation attempted (61.7 versus 55.1%) or naloxone administered (41.2 versus 28.9%). CONCLUSIONS: People experiencing homelessness account for an increasing proportion of fatal opioid-related overdoses in Ontario, Canada, reaching nearly one in six such deaths in 2021.

The impact of COVID-19 on opioid toxicity deaths for people who experience incarceration compared to the general population in Ontario: A whole population data linkage study.

BACKGROUND: To inform preparedness and population health action, we need to understand the effects of COVID-19 on health inequities. In this study, we assess the impact of COVID-19 on opioid toxicity deaths among people who experience incarceration compared to others in the general population in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study for the period of January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2020. We accessed and linked coronial data on all opioid toxicity deaths in Ontario with correctional data for people aged 18 years and older who were incarcerated in a provincial correctional facility. We used data from the Statistics Canada Census to calculate whole population rates. We used an interrupted time series design and segmented regression to assess for change in the level or rate of increase in deaths due to opioid toxicity coinciding with the COVID-19 pandemic. We compared the impact of COVID-19 on the opioid toxicity death rates for people exposed and not exposed to incarceration. RESULTS: Rates of opioid toxicity death increased with a linear positive slope in both persons exposed to incarceration and those not exposed over the study period. The start of COVID-19 measures coincided with a marked upward shift in the trend lines with modification of the effect of COVID-19 by both sex and exposure to incarceration. For persons exposed to incarceration, the risk ratio (RR) was 1.50 (95%CI 1.35-1.69) for males and 1.21 (95%CI 1.06-1.42) for females, and for persons not exposed to incarceration, the RR was 1.25 (95%CI 1.13-1.38) for males and not significant for females. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 substantially exacerbated the risk of opioid toxicity death, impacting males and females who experienced incarceration more than those who had not, with an immediate stepwise increase in risk but no change in the rate of increase of risk over time. Public health work, including pandemic preparedness, should consider the specific needs and circumstances of people who experience incarceration.

Improving the Reporting of Primary Care Research: Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care-the CRISP Statement.

Primary care (PC) is a unique clinical specialty and research discipline with its own perspectives and methods. Research in this field uses varied research methods and study designs to investigate myriad topics. The diversity of PC presents challenges for reporting, and despite the proliferation of reporting guidelines, none focuses specifically on the needs of PC. The Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Checklist guides reporting of PC research to include the information needed by the diverse PC community, including practitioners, patients, and communities. CRISP complements current guidelines to enhance the reporting, dissemination, and application of PC research findings and results. Prior CRISP studies documented opportunities to improve research reporting in this field. Our surveys of the international, interdisciplinary, and interprofessional PC community identified essential items to include in PC research reports. A 2-round Delphi study identified a consensus list of items considered necessary. The CRISP Checklist contains 24 items that describe the research team, patients, study participants, health conditions, clinical encounters, care teams, interventions, study measures, settings of care, and implementation of findings/results in PC. Not every item applies to every study design or topic. The CRISP guidelines inform the design and reporting of (1) studies done by PC researchers, (2) studies done by other investigators in PC populations and settings, and (3) studies intended for application in PC practice. Improved reporting of the context of the clinical services and the process of research is critical to interpreting study findings/results and applying them to diverse populations and varied settings in PC.Annals "Online First" article.

Efficacy of prescribed opioids for acute pain after being discharged from the emergency department: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are often prescribed for acute pain to patients discharged from the emergency department (ED), but there is a paucity of data on their short-term use. The purpose of this study was to synthesize the evidence regarding the efficacy of prescribed opioids compared to nonopioid analgesics for acute pain relief in ED-discharged patients. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and gray literature databases were searched from inception to January 2023. Two independent reviewers selected randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of prescribed opioids for ED-discharged patients, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Authors were contacted for missing data and to identify additional studies. The primary outcome was the difference in pain intensity scores or pain relief. All meta-analyses used a random-effect model and a sensitivity analysis compared patients treated with codeine versus those treated with other opioids. RESULTS: From 5419 initially screened citations, 46 full texts were evaluated and six studies enrolling 1161 patients were included. Risk of bias was low for five studies. There was no statistically significant difference in pain intensity scores or pain relief between opioids versus nonopioid analgesics (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.10 to 0.34). Contrary to children, adult patients treated with opioid had better pain relief (SMD 0.28, 95% CI 0.13-0.42) compared to nonopioids. In another sensitivity analysis excluding studies using codeine, opioids were more effective than nonopioids (SMD 0.30, 95% CI 0.15-0.45). However, there were more adverse events associated with opioids (odds ratio 2.64, 95% CI 2.04-3.42). CONCLUSIONS: For ED-discharged patients with acute musculoskeletal pain, opioids do not seem to be more effective than nonopioid analgesics. However, this absence of efficacy seems to be driven by codeine, as opioids other than codeine are more effective than nonopioids (mostly NSAIDs). Further prospective studies on the efficacy of short-term opioid use after ED discharge (excluding codeine), measuring patient-centered outcomes, adverse events, and potential misuse, are needed.

Burden of opioid toxicity death in the fentanyl-dominant era for people who experience incarceration in Ontario, Canada, 2015-2020: a whole population retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe mortality due to opioid toxicity among people who experienced incarceration in Ontario between 2015 and 2020, during the fentanyl-dominant era. DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, we linked Ontario coronial data on opioid toxicity deaths between 2015 and 2020 with correctional data for adults incarcerated in Ontario provincial correctional facilities. SETTING: Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Whole population data. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was opioid toxicity death and the exposure was any incarceration in a provincial correctional facility between 2015 and 2020. We calculated crude death rates and age-standardised mortality ratios (SMR). RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2020, 8460 people died from opioid toxicity in Ontario. Of those, 2207 (26.1%) were exposed to incarceration during the study period. Among those exposed to incarceration during the study period (n=1 29 152), 1.7% died from opioid toxicity during this period. Crude opioid toxicity death rates per 10 000 persons years were 43.6 (95% CI=41.8 to 45.5) for those exposed to incarceration and 0.95 (95% CI=0.93 to 0.97) for those not exposed. Compared with those not exposed, the SMR for people exposed to incarceration was 31.2 (95% CI=29.8 to 32.6), and differed by sex, at 28.1 (95% CI=26.7 to 29.5) for males and 77.7 (95% CI=69.6 to 85.9) for females. For those exposed to incarceration who died from opioid toxicity, 10.6% died within 14 days of release and the risk was highest between days 4 and 7 postrelease, at 288.1 per 10 000 person years (95% CI=227.8 to 348.1). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of opioid toxicity death is many times higher for people who experience incarceration compared with others in Ontario. Risk is markedly elevated in the week after release, and women who experience incarceration have a substantially higher SMR than men who experience incarceration. Initiatives to prevent deaths should consider programmes and policies in correctional facilities to address high risk on release.

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.

Qualitative Exploration of Emergency Department Care Experiences Among People With Opioid Use Disorder.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We described the experiences and preferences of people with opioid use disorder who access emergency department (ED) services regarding ED care and ED-based interventions. METHODS: Between June and September 2020, we conducted phone or in-person semistructured qualitative interviews with patients recently discharged from 2 urban EDs in Vancouver, BC, Canada, to explore experiences and preferences of ED care and ED-based opioid use disorder interventions. We recruited participants from a cohort of adults with opioid use disorder who were participating in an ED-initiated outreach program. We transcribed audio recordings verbatim. We iteratively developed a thematic coding structure, with interim analyses to assess for thematic saturation. Two team members with lived experience of opioid use provided feedback on content, wording, and analysis throughout the study. RESULTS: We interviewed 19 participants. Participants felt discriminated against for their drug use, which led to poorer perceived health care and downstream ED avoidance. Participants desired to be treated like ED patients who do not use drugs and to be more involved in their ED care. Participants nevertheless felt comfortable discussing their substance use with ED staff and valued continuous ED operating hours. Regarding opioid use disorder treatment, participants supported ED-based buprenorphine/naloxone programs but also suggested additional options (eg, different initiation regimens and settings and other opioid agonist therapies) to facilitate further treatment uptake. CONCLUSION: Based on participant experiences, we recommend addressing potentially stigmatizing practices, increasing patient involvement in their care during ED visits, and increasing access to various opioid use disorder-related treatments and community support.

Limited evidence that emergency department care is more costly than other outpatient settings for low-acuity conditions: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Caring for patients with low-acuity conditions in Emergency Departments (ED) is often thought to cost more than treating those patients in other ambulatory settings. Understanding the relative cost of care between settings has critical implications for healthcare policy and system design. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of papers comparing the cost of care for low-acuity and ambulatory care sensitive conditions in ED and other outpatient settings. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science for peer reviewed papers, plus Google for grey literature. We conducted duplicate screening and data extraction, and quality assessment of included studies using an adapted SIGN checklist for economic studies. We calculated an unweighted mean charge ratio across studies and summarized our findings in narrative and tabular format. RESULTS: We identified one study comparing costs. 18 studies assessed physician or facility charges, conducted in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada, including cohort analyses (5), charge analyses (5), survey (1), and database searches (5) assessing populations ranging from 370 participants to 60 million. Charge ratios ranged from 0.60 to 13.45 with an unweighted mean of 4.20. Most (12) studies were of acceptable quality. CONCLUSION: No studies since 2001 assess the comparative costs of ED versus non-ED care for low-acuity ambulatory conditions. Physician and facility charges for ED care are higher than in other ambulatory settings for low-acuity conditions. Empirical evidence is lacking to support that ED care is more costly than similar care in other ambulatory settings.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: La prise en charge des patients souffrant d'affections de faible gravité dans les services d'urgence est souvent considérée comme plus coûteuse que la prise en charge de ces mêmes patients dans d'autres structures ambulatoires. Comprendre le coût relatif des soins entre les différents environnements a des implications cruciales pour la politique des soins de santé et la conception des systèmes. MéTHODES: Nous avons procédé à un examen systématique des documents comparant le coût des soins pour les affections à faible gravité et les affections sensibles aux soins ambulatoires dans les services d'urgence et dans d'autres établissements de soins ambulatoires. Nous avons effectué des recherches dans PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL et Web of Science pour les articles évalués par des pairs, ainsi que dans Google pour la littérature grise. Nous avons procédé à une double sélection et à une extraction des données, ainsi qu'à une évaluation de la qualité des études incluses à l'aide d'une liste de contrôle SIGN adaptée aux études économiques. Nous avons calculé un ratio moyen non pondéré pour l'ensemble des études et avons résumé nos conclusions sous forme de texte et de tableau. RéSULTATS: Nous avons identifié une étude comparant les coûts. 18 études ont évalué les frais des médecins ou des établissements, menées aux États-Unis, au Royaume-Uni et au Canada, y compris des analyses de cohortes (5), des analyses de frais (5), des enquêtes (1) et des recherches dans des bases de données (5) évaluant des populations allant de 370 participants à 60 millions de personnes. Les taux d'imputation allaient de 0,60 à 13,45, avec une moyenne non pondérée de 4,20. La plupart des études (12) étaient de qualité acceptable. CONCLUSION: Depuis 2001, aucune étude n'a évalué les coûts comparatifs des soins aux urgences par rapport aux soins hors urgences pour les affections ambulatoires de faible gravité. Les honoraires des médecins et des établissements pour les soins aux urgences sont plus élevés que dans d'autres structures ambulatoires pour les affections de faible gravité. Il n'existe pas de données empiriques permettant d'affirmer que les soins aux urgences sont plus coûteux que des soins similaires dispensés dans d'autres structures ambulatoires.

Respiratory infectious disease outbreaks among people experiencing homelessness: a systematic review of prevention and mitigation strategies.

PURPOSE: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) are at increased risk of respiratory infections and associated morbidity and mortality. To characterize optimal intervention strategies, we completed a systematic review of mitigation strategies for PEH to minimize the spread and impact of respiratory infectious disease outbreaks, including COVID-19. METHODS: The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (#2020 CRD42020208964) and was consistent with the preferred reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. A search algorithm containing keywords that were synonymous to the terms "Homeless" and "Respiratory Illness" was applied to the six databases. The search concluded on September 22, 2020. Quality assessment was performed at the study level. Steps were conducted by two independent team members. RESULTS: A total of 4468 unique titles were retrieved with 21 meeting criteria for inclusion. Interventions included testing, tracking, screening, infection prevention and control, isolation support, and education. Historically, there has been limited study of intervention strategies specifically for PEH across the world. CONCLUSIONS: Staff and organizations providing services for people experiencing homelessness face specific challenges in adhering to public health guidelines such as physical distancing, isolation, and routine hygiene practices. There is a discrepancy between the burden of infectious diseases among PEH and specific research characterizing optimal intervention strategies to mitigate transmission in the context of shelters. Improving health for people experiencing homelessness necessitates investment in programs scaling existing interventions and research to study new approaches.

Validating the Remote First Aid Self-Efficacy Scale for Use in Evaluation and Training of First Responders in Remote Contexts.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the remote first aid self-efficacy scale (RFA SES). The RFA SES is a 30-item self-report scale developed in response to emerging evidence showing that self-efficacy is predictive of performance. METHODS: Trained alumni from Wilderness Medical Associates (WMA) training courses and less trained students from Laurentian University (LU) were recruited via email to complete an online questionnaire at 2 different periods (T1 and T2). The questionnaire included demographic questions, the 30-item RFA SES, the 10-item Connor-Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC), and the 10-item generalized self-efficacy scale (GSES). Data analysis included assessment of the dimensionality, reliability, and validity of the scale. RESULTS: There were 448 alumni from WMA and 1106 students from LU who participated in the study. The RFA SES demonstrated a clear unidimensional structure. The mean interitem correlation was 0.75 at T1. Test-retest reliability (T1 to T2) was high for both the LU group (intraclass correlation [ICC]=0.90) and the WMA group (ICC=0.92). Moderate correlations were found between RFA SES and CD-RISC (r=0.42, P<0.001), a general measure of resilience, and the GSES (r=0.48, P<0.001), a general measure of self-efficacy. Wilderness Medical Associates participants showed higher mean scores than LU students at T1 (t [569]=16.2, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The RFA SES is a unidimensional, reliable, and potentially valid scale. Further research should focus on item reduction followed by additional tests of reliability and validity.

Key items for reports of primary care research: an international Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: Reporting guidelines can improve dissemination and application of findings and help avoid research waste. Recent studies reveal opportunities to improve primary care (PC) reporting. Despite increasing numbers of guidelines, none exists for PC research. This study aims to prioritise candidate reporting items to inform a reporting guideline for PC research. DESIGN: Delphi study conducted by the Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Working Group. SETTING: International online survey. PARTICIPANTS: Interdisciplinary PC researchers and research users. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We drew potential reporting items from literature review and a series of international, interdisciplinary surveys. Using an anonymous, online survey, we asked participants to vote on and whether each candidate item should be included, required or recommended in a PC research reporting guideline. Items advanced to the next Delphi round if they received>50% votes to include. Analysis used descriptive statistics plus synthesis of free-text responses. RESULTS: 98/116 respondents completed round 1 (84% response rate) and 89/98 completed round 2 (91%). Respondents included a variety of healthcare professions, research roles, levels of experience and all five world regions. Round 1 presented 29 potential items, and 25 moved into round 2 after rewording and combining items and adding 2 new items. A majority of round 2 respondents voted to include 23 items (90%-100% for 11 items, 80%-89% for 3 items, 70%-79% for 3 items, 60%-69% for 3 items and 50%-59% for 3 items). CONCLUSION: Our Delphi study identified items to guide the reporting of PC research that has broad endorsement from the community of producers and users of PC research. We will now use these results to inform the final development of the CRISP guidance for reporting PC research.

Exploring COVID-19 vaccine uptake, confidence and hesitancy among people experiencing homelessness in Toronto, Canada: protocol for the Ku-gaa-gii pimitizi-win qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: People experiencing homelessness are at high risk for COVID-19 and poor outcomes if infected. Vaccination offers protection against serious illness, and people experiencing homelessness have been prioritised in the vaccine roll-out in Toronto, Canada. Yet, current COVID-19 vaccination rates among people experiencing homelessness are lower than the general population. This study aims to characterise reasons for COVID-19 vaccine uptake and hesitancy among people experiencing homelessness, to identify strategies to overcome hesitancy and provide public health decision-makers with information to improve vaccine confidence and uptake in this priority population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Ku-gaa-gii pimitizi-win qualitative study (formerly the COVENANT study) will recruit up to 40 participants in Toronto who are identified as experiencing homelessness at the time of recruitment. Semistructured interviews with participants will explore general experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic (eg, loss of housing, social connectedness), perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine, factors shaping vaccine uptake and strategies for supporting enablers, addressing challenges and building vaccine confidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval for this study was granted by Unity Health Toronto Research Ethics Board. Findings will be communicated to groups organising vaccination efforts in shelters, community groups and the City of Toronto to construct more targeted interventions that address reasons for vaccine hesitancy among people experiencing homelessness. Key outputs will include a community report, academic publications, presentations at conferences and a Town Hall that will bring together people with lived expertise of homelessness, shelter staff, leading scholars, community experts and public health partners.

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.

Resuscitation simulation among people who are likely to witness opioid overdose: Experiences from the SOONER Trial.

The opioid crisis is a growing public health emergency and increasing resources are being directed towards overdose education. Simulation has emerged as a novel strategy for training overdose response, yet little is known about training non-clinicians in bystander resuscitation. Understanding the perspectives of individuals who are likely to experience or witness opioid overdose is critical to ensure that emergency response is effective. The Surviving Opioid Overdose with Naloxone Education and Resuscitation (SOONER) study evaluates the effectiveness of a novel naloxone education and distribution tool among people who are non-clinicians and likely to witness opioid overdose. Participants' resuscitation skills are evaluated using a realistic overdose simulation as the primary outcome of the trial. The purpose of our study is to describe the experience of participants with the simulation process in the SOONER study. We employed a semi-structured debriefing interview and a follow up qualitative interview to understand the experience of participants with simulation. A qualitative content analysis was performed using data from 21 participants who participated in the SOONER study. Our qualitative analysis identified 5 themes and 17 subthemes which described the experience of participants within the simulation process. These themes included realism, valuing practical experience, improving self-efficacy, gaining new perspective and bidirectional learning. Our analysis found that simulation was a positive and empowering experience for participants in the SOONER trial, most of whom are marginalized in society. Our study supports the notion that expanding simulation-based education to non-clinicians may offer an acceptable and effective way of supplementing current opioid overdose education strategies. Increasing the accessibility of simulation-based education may represent a paradigm shift whereby simulation is transformed from a primarily academic practice into a patient-based community resource.