Examining the effects of COVID-19 on pharmacy dispensing of naloxone and syringes sales across Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdowns disrupted access to harm reduction supplies and services known to be effective in overdose prevention and contributed to a worsening of the opioid crisis. However, because pharmacies can provide naloxone and sell over-the-counter (OTC) sterile syringes, their continued operation throughout the pandemic potentially reinforced a public health role as a distribution hub for safer use supplies. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this analysis was to examine patterns of naloxone and OTC syringe sale volume at 463 community pharmacies in 2 states with high overdose rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We analyzed weekly pharmacy-level dispensing data from January 5, 2020, to December 31, 2020, from one corporate community pharmacy chain in Massachusetts (n = 415 pharmacies) and New Hampshire (n = 48 pharmacies). Descriptive statistics and visualizations over the analytical period were generated as initial explorations of the outcome. Zero-inflated Poisson and negative binomial models were used to analyze distribution data along with county-level COVID-19 case rates and store-level COVID-19 testing location status during the same time. Interactions tested the effect of COVID-19 case rates on naloxone and OTC syringe sales. RESULTS: Pharmacies that reported selling nonprescription syringes and dispensing naloxone during the study period averaged 210.13 OTC syringes sold and 0.53 naloxone prescriptions per week. Pharmacies in communities that experienced greater COVID-19 case burden also exhibited higher naloxone dispensing and OTC syringe sales during this period. The odds of selling OTC syringes increased over time but naloxone dispensing remained constant over the pandemic year. Pharmacies hosting COVID-19 testing tended to have lower OTC syringe sales and naloxone provision than nontesting sites. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, pharmacies provided harm reduction services and dispensed lifesaving medications by quickly adapting to fulfill community needs without disrupting co-located services for COVID-19 response.

"Like it was just everyday business": A qualitative study of pharmacy-based naloxone and syringe customer experience.

BACKGROUND: As rates of overdoses involving opioids continue to rise in the United States, community pharmacies are uniquely positioned as a central access point of care for individuals to access harm reduction supplies, such as naloxone and nonprescription syringes (NPS). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify the facilitators and barriers of obtaining naloxone and NPS at community pharmacies that participated in Respond to Prevent (R2P), a multicomponent intervention to increase dispensing rates of naloxone, buprenorphine, and NPS. METHODS: Pharmacy customers were recruited to participate in semistructured qualitative interviews conducted immediately after they obtained, or attempted to obtain, naloxone and NPS (when applicable) from R2P-participating pharmacies. Thematic analysis was conducted on the transcribed interviews, and content coding was applied to ethnographic notes and text messages from participants. RESULTS: Of the 32 participants, most (n = 28, 88%) successfully obtained naloxone and most of those seeking NPS successfully (n = 14, 82%) purchased them as well. Participants reported positive overall experiences at the community pharmacies. Participants described using the intervention advertising materials, as designed, to facilitate the request for naloxone. Many participants shared that they felt respected by pharmacists and that they valued naloxone counseling sessions that were tailored to meet their needs and allowed space for them to ask questions. Barriers included experiences where the intervention did not address structural challenges that prohibited the purchase of naloxone and where certain types of staff lacked knowledge, treated participants poorly, or did not adequately provide expected naloxone counseling. CONCLUSION: Pharmacy customer experiences obtaining naloxone and NPS in R2P-participating pharmacies identify facilitators and barriers to access that may be used to reform implementation and future interventions. Barriers identified can help enhance strategies or inform policies to improve pharmacy-based harm reduction supply distribution not addressed through existing interventions.

Study protocol for the Respond to Prevent Study: a multi-state randomized controlled trial to improve provision of naloxone, buprenorphine and nonprescription syringes in community pharmacies.

Access to the opioid antidote naloxone is a critical component of addressing the opioid crisis. Naloxone is a population-level prevention intervention associated with substantial reductions in overdose mortality and reduction of nonfatal overdose. Pharmacies' pivotal role in dispensing medications like buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder and selling nonprescription syringes places them at the crossroads of opioid access and risk mitigation methods like naloxone provision. Testing ways to optimize pharmacy-based naloxone provision will be key as the country expands the implementation of naloxone through the medical system. In the Respond to Prevent Study, we conducted a large, practical study of a pharmacy-focused intervention in a sample of Washington, Oregon, Massachusetts and New Hampshire community chain pharmacies to increase naloxone dispensing and improve opioid safety. The intervention integrated two evidence-based educational toolkits and streamlined materials to enhance the focus on naloxone policy, stigma reduction, and patient communications around naloxone, nonprescription syringes and buprenorphine access. The real-world study implemented a stepped wedge, clustered randomized trial design across 175 community chain pharmacies to evaluate the effectiveness of the Respond to Prevent intervention in increasing: (a) pharmacy based naloxone distribution rates, naloxone-related patient engagement, and pharmacist and technicians' attitudes, knowledge, perceived behavioral control and self-efficacy toward naloxone; and (b) pharmacy nonprescription syringe sales, and pharmacist and technicians' attitudes, knowledge, perceived behavioral control and self-efficacy toward dispensing buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (secondary outcomes). This commentary provides a brief narrative about the study and presents insights on the design and adaptations to our study protocol, including those adopted during the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic further compounded by Western wildfires in 2020.

Examining nonprescription syringe sales in Massachusetts and Rhode Island community pharmacies.

BACKGROUND: The role pharmacies play in addressing the opioid crisis and drug-related risks such as injection drug use is evolving. Estimating the prevalence of injection drug use at the community level is challenging because of the stigma of drug use. Many community pharmacies sell nonprescription sterile syringes; thus, pharmacy-level sales of injection equipment may be an indicator of drug-related harms and unmet needs of high-risk populations. OBJECTIVES: To describe, compare, and assess the convergent validity of staff-reported nonprescription syringe (NPS) sales volume and NPS administrative sales data from community pharmacies in Massachusetts (MA) and Rhode Island (RI). METHODS: This study employed both prospective cross-sectional survey data collection and utilization of administrative pharmacy sales data. Between November 2017 and January 2018, we administered a telephone-based survey to estimate average weekly NPS type and volume for 191 chain pharmacies (CVS Health) located in communities experiencing fatal opioid overdoses above the state's 2015 annual median rate. For the same time period, we obtained NPS sales data from surveyed pharmacies and all CVS Health pharmacies in the 2 states. We calculated Spearman correlations to assess convergence of average weekly volume between pharmacy staff reports and sales data. RESULTS: All pharmacies responded to the survey. Most (98.4%) pharmacies surveyed sold NPS, but 42.0% reported running out of stock monthly or more frequently. Pharmacy staff tended to under-report syringe sales. Staff-reported weekly NPS sales volume was 67,922 versus 70,962 syringes from administrative pharmacy sales data. Spearman correlation between reported and actual NPS sales was 0.40 (95% CI 0.27-0.51). CONCLUSION: The counts of administrative pharmacy syringe sales data in MA and RI indicate high need, substantial volume, and notable access at community pharmacies. Future research should use NPS sales data rather than self-report data to track emerging trends and tailor local responses.

"I go out of my way to give them an extra smile now:" A study of pharmacists who participated in Respond to Prevent, a community pharmacy intervention to accelerate provision of harm reduction materials.

BACKGROUND: Community pharmacies are well-positioned to improve the health of people with opioid use disorder and who use drugs by providing naloxone and other essential public health supplies. Respond to Prevent (R2P) is a clinical trial which sought to accelerate provision of harm reduction materials through a multicomponent intervention that included in-store materials, online training, and academic detailing. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to explore pharmacists' attitudes, knowledge, and experiences in providing naloxone, dispensing buprenorphine, and selling nonprescription syringes following participation in the R2P program. METHODS: Two online asynchronous focus groups were conducted with community-based chain pharmacists across Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Washington who had participated in the R2P program. Participants accessed an online repository of group interview items and responded to questions over a short period. Each pharmacist participated anonymously for approximately 30 min over 2 ½ days. Pharmacists answered questions on experiences with pharmacy-based harm reduction care and R2P intervention implementation barriers and facilitators. Qualitative data analysis was conducted by a multidisciplinary team using an immersion-crystallization approach. RESULTS: A total of 32 pharmacists participated in the two focus groups. Most participants were female (n = 18, 56%), non-Hispanic (n = 29, 91%), and white (n = 17, 53%). Four major themes were identified related to (1) addressing bias and stigma toward people with opioid use disorder and who use drugs, (2) familiarity and comfort with naloxone provision, (3) perspective and practice shifts in nonprescription syringe sales, (4) structural challenges to harm reduction care in the pharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacists across the four states identified attitudes, knowledge, and experiences that create barriers to providing care to people with opioid use disorder and who use drugs. R2P approaches and tools were effective at reducing stigma and changing attitudes but were less effective at addressing structural challenges from the pharmacists' perspective.

Implementing a pharmacist-integrated collaborative model of medication treatment for opioid use disorder in primary care: study design and methodological considerations.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacists remain an underutilized resource in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). Although studies have engaged pharmacists in dispensing medications for OUD (MOUD), few studies have evaluated collaborative care models in which pharmacists are an active, integrated part of a primary care team offering OUD care. METHODS: This study seeks to implement a pharmacist integrated MOUD clinical model (called PrIMO) and evaluate its feasibility, acceptability, and impact across four diverse primary care sites. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research is used as an organizing framework for study development and interpretation of findings. Implementation Facilitation is used to support PrIMO adoption. We assess the primary outcome, the feasibility of implementing PrIMO, using the Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC). We evaluate the acceptability and impact of the PrIMO model at the sites using mixed-methods and combine survey and interview data from providers, pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, administrators, and patients receiving MOUD at the primary care sites with patient electronic health record data. We hypothesize that it is feasible to launch delivery of the PrIMO model (reach SIC Stage 6), and that it is acceptable, will positively impact patient outcomes 1 year post model launch (e.g., increased MOUD treatment retention, medication regimen adherence, service utilization for co-morbid conditions, and decreased substance use), and will increase each site's capacity to care for patients with MOUD (e.g., increased number of patients, number of prescribers, and rate of patients per prescriber). DISCUSSION: This study will provide data on a pharmacist-integrated collaborative model of care for the treatment of OUD that may be feasible, acceptable to both site staff and patients and may favorably impact patients' access to MOUD and treatment outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05310786) on April 5, 2022, https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/study/NCT05310786?id=NCT05310786&rank=1.

Technology-Based Interventions in Substance Use Treatment to Promote Health Equity Among People Who Identify as African American/Black, Hispanic/Latinx, and American Indian/Alaskan Native: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Technology-based interventions (TBIs; ie, web-based and mobile interventions) have the potential to promote health equity in substance use treatment (SUTx) for underrepresented groups (people who identify as African American/Black, Hispanic/Latinx, and American Indian/Alaskan Native) by removing barriers and increasing access to culturally relevant effective treatments. However, technologies (emergent and more long-standing) may have unintended consequences that could perpetuate health care disparities among people who identify as a member of one of the underrepresented groups. Health care research, and SUTx research specifically, is infrequently conducted with people who identify with these groups as the main focus. Therefore, an improved understanding of the literature at the intersection of SUTx, TBIs, and underrepresented groups is warranted to avoid exacerbating inequities and to promote health equity. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore peer-reviewed literature (January 2000-March 2021) that includes people who identify as a member of one of the underrepresented groups in SUTx research using TBIs. We further seek to explore whether this subset of research is race/ethnicity conscious (does the research consider members of underrepresented groups beyond their inclusion as study participants in the introduction, methods, results, or discussion). METHODS: Five electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PsycInfo) were searched to identify SUTx research using TBIs, and studies were screened for eligibility at the title/abstract and full-text levels. Studies were included if their sample comprised of people who identify as a member of one of the underrepresented groups at 50% or more when combined. RESULTS: Title/abstract and full-text reviews were completed in 2021. These efforts netted a sample of 185 studies that appear to meet inclusionary criteria. Due to the uniqueness of tobacco relative to other substances in the SUTx space, as well as the large number of studies netted, we plan to separately publish a scoping review on tobacco-focused studies that meet all other criteria. Filtering for tobacco-focused studies (n=31) netted a final full-text sample for a main scoping review of 154 studies. The tobacco-focused scoping review manuscript is expected to be submitted for peer review in Spring 2022. The main scoping review data extraction and data validation to confirm the accuracy and consistency of data extraction across records was completed in March 2022. We expect to publish the main scoping review findings by the end of 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Research is needed to increase our understanding of the range and nature of TBIs being used in SUTx research studies with members of underrepresented groups. The planned scoping review will highlight research at this intersection to promote health equity. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/34508.

Estimating naloxone need in the USA across fentanyl, heroin, and prescription opioid epidemics: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: The US overdose crisis is driven by fentanyl, heroin, and prescription opioids. One evidence-based policy response has been to broaden naloxone distribution, but how much naloxone a community would need to reduce the incidence of fatal overdose is unclear. We aimed to estimate state-level US naloxone need in 2017 across three main naloxone access points (community-based programmes, provider prescription, and pharmacy-initiated distribution) and by dominant opioid epidemic type (fentanyl, heroin, and prescription opioid). METHODS: In this modelling study, we developed, parameterised, and applied a mechanistic model of risk of opioid overdose and used it to estimate the expected reduction in opioid overdose mortality after deployment of a given number of two-dose naloxone kits. We performed a literature review and used a modified-Delphi panel to inform parameter definitions. We refined an established model of the population at risk of overdose by incorporating changes in the toxicity of the illicit drug supply and in the naloxone access point, then calibrated the model to 2017 using data obtained from proprietary data sources, state health departments, and national surveys for 12 US states that were representative of each epidemic type. We used counterfactual modelling to project the effect of increased naloxone distribution on the estimated number of opioid overdose deaths averted with naloxone and the number of naloxone kits needed to be available for at least 80% of witnessed opioid overdoses, by US state and access point. FINDINGS: Need for naloxone differed by epidemic type, with fentanyl epidemics having the consistently highest probability of naloxone use during witnessed overdose events (range 58-76% across the three modelled states in this category) and prescription opioid-dominated epidemics having the lowest (range 0-20%). Overall, in 2017, community-based and pharmacy-initiated naloxone access points had higher probability of naloxone use in witnessed overdose and higher numbers of deaths averted per 100 000 people in state-specific results with these two access points than with provider-prescribed access only. To achieve a target of naloxone use in 80% of witnessed overdoses, need varied from no additional kits (estimated as sufficient) to 1270 kits needed per 100 000 population across the 12 modelled states annually. In 2017, only Arizona had sufficient kits to meet this target. INTERPRETATION: Opioid epidemic type and how naloxone is accessed have large effects on the number of naloxone kits that need to be distributed, the probability of naloxone use, and the number of deaths due to overdose averted. The extent of naloxone distribution, especially through community-based programmes and pharmacy-initiated access points, warrants substantial expansion in nearly every US state. FUNDING: National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Trends in and correlates of tranquilizer misuse among adults who misuse opioids in the United States, 2002-2014.

PURPOSE: Almost a third of opioid overdose deaths also involve benzodiazepines, but few representative studies have examined misuse of benzodiazepines and other tranquilizers by adults who misuse opioids. This study estimated the prevalence and frequency of tranquilizer misuse among adults who misuse opioids and examined characteristics associated with tranquilizer misuse. METHODS: A sample of adults who misused opioids in the past year (n = 36,043) were identified in the National Surveys on Drug Use and Health 2002-2014. Tranquilizer misuse prevalence was estimated for each year from 2002 to 2014. Data were then pooled for all years. Multiple logistic and Poisson regression was used to identify characteristics independently associated with the prevalence and frequency tranquilizer misuse respectively. RESULTS: Twenty-eight percent of adults who misused illicit opioids in the past year also reported tranquilizer misuse. This prevalence did not change notably over the 13-year period examined. Among those who misused opioids, meeting criteria for opioid abuse or dependence was associated with a 134% increase in the odds of misusing tranquilizers during the same year. Other characteristics associated with increased odds of tranquilizer misuse included being aged 18-25 years, non-Hispanic white, uninsured, unemployed, and having used heroin. CONCLUSIONS: Tranquilizer misuse is common among adults who misuse opioids and has not changed substantially over the past decade. Meeting criteria for abuse or dependence of opioids is associated with more than double the odds of tranquilizer misuse among adults who misuse opioids.

Bystander Intervention Among College Men: The Role of Alcohol and Correlates of Sexual Aggression.

Current efforts to reduce sexual violence in college campuses underscore the role of engaging men in prosocial bystander behavior. The current study implemented an online survey to explore associations between engaging in heavy drinking and attitudes toward bystander intervention among a sample of college men (N = 242). Correlates of sexual aggression were also explored as mediators of the hypothesized relationship between engaging in heavy drinking and attitudes toward bystander intervention. Data indicated that men who engaged in two or more episodes of heavy drinking over the past month reported lower prosocial bystander attitudes compared with men who did not engage in such behavior. The association between engaging in heavy drinking and lower prosocial bystander attitudes was mediated by men's perception of their peers' approval for sexual aggression, their own comfort with sexism, and engagement in coercive sexual behavior. Implications for sexual assault prevention are discussed.