"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.

Differences in Substance Use and Harm Reduction Practices by Race and Ethnicity: Rhode Island Harm Reduction Surveillance System, 2021-2022.

CONTEXT: In the United States, minority populations are disproportionately affected by the overdose epidemic, have higher mortality rates, and unequal access to harm reduction and treatment services. OBJECTIVE: This analysis aims to better understand harm reduction utilization and substance use patterns among minority populations to improve overdose outreach and prevention initiatives in Rhode Island. DESIGN: The present analysis used data from the Harm Reduction Surveillance System from January 2021 to December 2022 (N = 393). Chi-square tests and multivariable regression models were used to investigate differences in substance use behaviors by race and ethnicity. SETTING: Rhode Island. PARTICIPANTS: Participants include individuals who self-reported the use of illicit drugs, currently reside in Rhode Island, and were older than 18 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Methods of drug use and uptake of harm reduction practices. RESULTS: Among survey participants, 41% were non-Hispanic White, 57% were aged 25 to 44 years, 62% identified as male, and 95% had health insurance coverage. Most participants reported smoking as their method of drug use (90%) and harm reduction practices were underutilized by all race and ethnicity groups. Fewer non-Hispanic Black participants reported carrying naloxone compared to the other race and ethnicity groups. Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic participants were significantly less likely to inject drugs compared with non-Hispanic White participants (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04-0.45) (AOR = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.18-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Smoking was the most common self-reported method of substance administration for all participants, whereas injection was more prevalent among non-Hispanic White participants. There is a continued need for minority-led and culturally informed harm reduction and treatment services for minority populations.

The Bronze Age of drug checking: barriers and facilitators to implementing advanced drug checking amidst police violence and COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Unpredictable fluctuations in the illicit drug market increase overdose risk. Drug checking, or the use of technology to provide insight into the contents of illicit drug products, is an overdose prevention strategy with an emerging evidence base. The use of portable spectrometry devices to provide point-of-service analysis of the contents of illicit drugs been adopted by harm reduction organizations internationally but is only emerging in the United States. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators of implementing drug checking services with spectrometry devices in an urban harm reduction organization and syringe service program serving economically marginalized people who use drugs in Boston, Massachusetts (USA). METHODS: In-vivo observations and semi-structured interviews with harm reduction staff and participants were conducted between March 2019 and December 2020. We used the consolidated framework for implementation research to identify implementation barriers and facilitators. RESULTS: This implementation effort was facilitated by the organization's shared culture of harm reduction-which fostered shared implementation goals and beliefs about the intervention among staff persons-its horizontal organizational structure, strong identification with the organization among staff, and strong relationships with external funders. Barriers to implementation included the technological complexity of the advanced spectroscopy devices utilized for drug checking. Program staff indicated that commercially available spectroscopy devices are powerful but not always well-suited for drug checking efforts, describing their technological capacities as "the Bronze Age of Drug Checking." Other significant barriers include the legal ambiguity of drug checking services, disruptive and oppositional police activity, and the responses and programmatic changes demanded by the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: For harm reduction organizations to be successful in efforts to implement and scale drug checking services, these critical barriers-especially regressive policing policies and prohibitive costs-need to be addressed. Future research on the impact of policy changes to reduce the criminalization of substance use or to provide explicit legal frameworks for the provision of this and other harm reduction services may be merited.

Tele-buprenorphine for emergency department overdose visit follow up and treatment initiation.

INTRODUCTION: An ED visit for opioid overdose may be a person's only contact with the medical and behavioral health care systems and is an important opportunity to reduce risk of subsequent overdose and death. While ED initiatives to engage people with opioid use disorder (OUD) are being increasingly implemented, there are significant gaps in the receipt of services at the time of the ED encounter. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of an outreach pilot project providing real-time telehealth delivered buprenorphine initiation and referral to community harm reduction and addiction treatment services via a follow up telephone call to patients after an ED visit for an opioid overdose. RESULTS: From January 2020 to April 2021 there were 606 patients with an ED visit for an opioid overdose eligible for a callback. Of the 606 eligible patients, 254/645 (42%) patients could be contacted and accepted service and/or treatment referrals. Fifteen patients were connected same-day to a buprenorphine prescriber for a telehealth encounter and, of connected patients, nine received a buprenorphine prescription. CONCLUSION: A post-ED follow up telephone call protocol is an opportunity to improve treatment engagement and access to buprenorphine for patients at high risk for opioid overdose and death.

Willingness to Use Safe Consumption Spaces among Opioid Users at High Risk of Fentanyl Overdose in Baltimore, Providence, and Boston.

Safe consumption spaces (SCS) are evidence-based interventions that reduce drug-related morbidity and mortality operating in many countries. However, SCS are yet to be widely implemented in the USA despite the escalating overdose epidemic. The aim of this multi-city study was to identify the factors associated with willingness to use a SCS among people who use drugs (PWUD) in Baltimore, Providence, and Boston, stratified by injection drug use status. Our secondary aim was to characterize the anticipated barriers to accessing SCS if they were to be implemented in these cities. PWUD were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey in 2017. The analysis was restricted to 326 opioid users (i.e., heroin, fentanyl, and non-medical opioid pill use). The majority (77%) of participants expressed willingness to use a SCS (Baltimore, 78%; Providence, 68%; Boston. 84%). Most respondents were male (59%), older than 35 years (76%), non-white (64%), relied on public/semi-public settings to inject (60%), had a history of overdose (64%), and recently suspected fentanyl contamination of their drugs (73%). A quarter (26%) preferred drugs containing fentanyl. Among injectors, female gender, racial minority status, suspicion of drugs containing fentanyl, and drug use in public/semi-public settings were associated with higher willingness to use a SCS; prior arrest was associated with lower willingness. Among non-injectors, racial minority status, preference for fentanyl, and drug use in public/semi-public settings were associated with higher willingness, whereas recent overdose held a negative association. The most commonly anticipated barriers to accessing a SCS in the future were concerns around arrest (38%), privacy (34%), confidentiality/trust/safety (25%), and cost/time/transportation (16%). These data provide evidence of high SCS acceptability among high-risk PWUD in the USA, including those who prefer street fentanyl. As SCS are implemented in the USA, targeted engagement efforts may be required to reach individuals exposed to the criminal justice system.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Intensive Case Management (Project Bridge) for HIV-Infected Probationers and Parolees.

Individuals on probation and parole are disproportionately at high risk for HIV infection and experience significant barriers to accessing health care. This study was a two-group randomized controlled trial conducted at a community corrections office and was designed to link HIV positive probationers/parolees to HIV treatment in the community. HIV positive participants were assigned to one of the two treatment conditions: (1) Project Bridge (PB), an intensive case-management intervention; or (2) treatment as usual (TAU), involving standard referral to treatment. We hypothesized that PB would be more effective than TAU in terms of initiating individuals in community HIV treatment. We found no difference in rates of, or time to, treatment initiation when comparing the PB to TAU (all ns > 0.05). Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference between HIV medication regiment initiation by treatment condition (p > 0.05). Despite limitations, we found that probationers and parolees were willing to be screened and linked to treatment.

Beliefs About a Complementary and Alternative Therapy-Based Chronic Pain Management Program for a Medicaid Population.

OBJECTIVE: Rhode Island Medicaid offers high emergency department utilizers the opportunity to take part in the Chronic Pain Program, an integrated treatment approach that includes free complementary therapies (massage, chiropractic, and acupuncture). The aim of the current analysis was to understand beliefs about the Rhode Island Chronic Pain Program from the perspective of the patient receiving services, the provider delivering services, and the administrator implementing the program. DESIGN: A qualitative interview-based study. SUBJECTS: Patients (N = 24), providers (N = 13), and administrators (N = 11) who were already involved, or were eligible to be involved, in the Chronic Pain Program. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted to elicit information about experiences with the program. Transcriptions of audio recordings were analyzed according to principles of deductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Patient interviews revealed five themes: 1) relationship between stress and pain, 2) trusting patient-provider relationships, 3) increased quality of life, 4) temporary pain relief, and 5) anxiety and discomfort associated with acupuncture. Provider interviews revealed three themes: 1) a way to reach the disenfranchised, 2) not enough visits with patients, and 3) opportunity to build relationships with patients. Administrator interviews revealed two themes: 1) a means to offer a range of support services to complicated patients and 2) unanswered questions over whether the program adequately serves patients with the greatest needs. CONCLUSIONS: Key stakeholders in this new initiative agree that the Rhode Island Chronic Pain Program shows promise and that the holistic approach may be a good match for this hard-to-reach population.

Methadone continuation versus forced withdrawal on incarceration in a combined US prison and jail: a randomised, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Methadone is an effective treatment for opioid dependence. When people who are receiving methadone maintenance treatment for opioid dependence are incarcerated in prison or jail, most US correctional facilities discontinue their methadone treatment, either gradually, or more often, abruptly. This discontinuation can cause uncomfortable symptoms of withdrawal and renders prisoners susceptible to relapse and overdose on release. We aimed to study the effect of forced withdrawal from methadone upon incarceration on individuals' risk behaviours and engagement with post-release treatment programmes. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label trial, we randomly assigned (1:1) inmates of the Rhode Island Department of Corrections (RI, USA) who were enrolled in a methadone maintenance-treatment programme in the community at the time of arrest and wanted to remain on methadone treatment during incarceration and on release, to either continuation of their methadone treatment or to usual care--forced tapered withdrawal from methadone. Participants could be included in the study only if their incarceration would be more than 1 week but less than 6 months. We did the random assignments with a computer-generated random permutation, and urn randomisation procedures to stratify participants by sex and race. Participants in the continued-methadone group were maintained on their methadone dose at the time of their incarceration (with dose adjustments as clinically indicated). Patients in the forced-withdrawal group followed the institution's standard withdrawal protocol of receiving methadone for 1 week at the dose at the time of their incarceration, then a tapered withdrawal regimen (for those on a starting dose >100 mg, the dose was reduced by 5 mg per day to 100 mg, then reduced by 3 mg per day to 0 mg; for those on a starting dose >100 mg, the dose was reduced by 3 mg per day to 0 mg). The main outcomes were engagement with a methadone maintenance-treatment clinic after release from incarceration and time to engagement with methadone maintenance treatment, by intention-to-treat and as-treated analyses, which we established in a follow-up interview with the participants at 1 month after their release from incarceration. Our study paid for 10 weeks of methadone treatment after release if participants needed financial help. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01874964. FINDINGS: Between June 14, 2011, and April 3, 2013, we randomly assigned 283 prisoners to our study, 142 to continued methadone treatment, and 141 to forced withdrawal from methadone. Of these, 60 were excluded because they did not fit the eligibility criteria, leaving 114 in the continued-methadone group and 109 in the forced-withdrawal group (usual care). Participants assigned to continued methadone were more than twice as likely than forced-withdrawal participants to return to a community methadone clinic within 1 month of release (106 [96%] of 110 in the continued-methadone group compared with 68 [78%] of 87 in the forced-withdrawal group; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2·04, 95% CI 1·48-2·80). We noted no differences in serious adverse events between groups. For the continued-methadone and forced-withdrawal groups, the number of deaths were one and zero, non-fatal overdoses were one and two, admissions to hospital were one and four; and emergency-room visits were 11 and 16, respectively. INTERPRETATION: Although our study had several limitations--eg, it only included participants incarcerated for fewer than 6 months, we showed that forced withdrawal from methadone on incarceration reduced the likelihood of prisoners re-engaging in methadone maintenance after their release. Continuation of methadone maintenance during incarceration could contribute to greater treatment engagement after release, which could in turn reduce the risk of death from overdose and risk behaviours. FUNDING: National Institute on Drug Abuse and the Lifespan/Tufts/Brown Center for AIDS Research from the National Institutes of Health.

Two cases of intranasal naloxone self-administration in opioid overdose.

BACKGROUND: Overdose is a leading cause of death for former prisoners, exacting its greatest toll during the first 2 weeks post release. Protective effects have been observed with training individuals at high risk of overdose and prescribing them naloxone, an opioid antagonist that reverses the effects of the opioid-induced respiratory depression that causes death. CASES: The authors report 2 people with opiate use histories who self-administered intranasal naloxone to treat their own heroin overdoses following release from prison. Patient A is a 34-year-old male, who reported having experienced an overdose on heroin the day after he was released from incarceration. Patient B is a 29-year-old female, who reported an overdose on her first injection of heroin, 17 days post release from incarceration. Both patients self-administered the medication but were assisted at some point during the injury by a witness whom they had personally instructed in how to prepare and administer the medication. Neither patient experienced withdrawal symptoms following exposure to naloxone. DISCUSSION: Self-administration of naloxone should not be a goal of overdose death prevention training. A safer, more reliable approach is to prescribe naloxone to at-risk patients and train and also equip members of their household and social or drug-using networks in overdose prevention and response.

Attitudes of Black American Christian church leaders toward Opioid Use Disorder, overdoses, and harm reduction: a qualitative study.

Introduction: Black American Christian church leaders are trusted community members and can be invaluable leaders and planners, listeners, and counselors for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) sufferers in the opioid overdose crisis disproportionately affecting the Black community. This qualitative study examines the extent to which the knowledge, attitudes, practices, and beliefs of Black American church leaders support medical and harm reduction interventions for people with OUD. Methods: A semi-structured interview guide was used to conduct in-depth interviews of 30 Black Rhode Island church leaders recruited by convenience and snowball sampling. Results: Thematic analysis of the interviews identified four themes: Church leaders are empathetic and knowledgeable, believe that hopelessness and inequity are OUD risk factors, are committed to helping people flourish beyond staying alive, and welcome collaborations between church and state. Conclusion: Black American Christian church leaders are a critical resource in providing innovative and culturally sensitive strategies in the opioid overdose crisis affecting the Black American communities. As such, their views should be carefully considered in OUD policies, collaborations, and interventions in the Black American community.

Pilot findings on the real-world performance of xylazine test strips for drug residue testing and the importance of secondary testing methods.

Background: Xylazine is a sedative found increasingly in the illicit fentanyl supply that can cause hypotension, bradycardia, necrosis and death. This pilot examined the real-world performance of BTNX xylazine test strips (XTS) in drug residue samples. Methods: This study was nested within a drug checking service in Rhode Island. We tested unmeasured drug residue dissolved in 5 mL of distilled water using XTS and Liquid Chromatography Quadrupole Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry (LC-QTOF-MS). Analyses compared XTS and LC-QTOF-MS results to calculate XTS detection of xylazine in residue. Results: Among 41 residue samples, xylazine was detected in 11% by the XTS and 44 % by the laboratory. The LC-QTOF-MS detected xylazine in 18 samples: 4 major, 9 minor, 5 trace by volume relative to the whole sample. The XTS disagreed with the LC-QTOF-MS by indicating a negative result in 77.8 % (N=14) of the samples but never indicated a positive when the LC-QTOF-MS reported xylazine's absence. The XTS correctly detected xylazine 22 % of the time, however, this increased to 100 % of the time if xylazine was a major active component. Conclusions: In this study, the BTNX XTS often disagreed with LC-QTOF-MS by indicating a negative result, likely due to the dilution levels used and sample composition. The XTS may not be accurate in detecting residual amounts of xylazine, especially if xylazine is not a dominant component of the tested sample. Given the novelty of BTNX's XTS products, we recommend XTS only be used in conjunction with other advanced drug checking modalities for residue testing.

Xylazine awareness, desire, use and exposure: Preliminary findings from the Rhode Island community-based drug checking cohort study.

Background: Xylazine is an ⍺2 adrenergic receptor agonist and a veterinary sedative that can cause severe health complications yet interventions to detect and treat human exposure remain underdeveloped. Community-based drug checking services (DCS) involve the testing of small amounts of drugs to increase community knowledge of unregulated supplies and decrease harms. This study characterized xylazine awareness, desire, use and exposure among people who use drugs (PWUD) in Rhode Island, US. Methods: We analyzed data from an ongoing PWUD cohort study. In 2023, 125 PWUD were enrolled and surveyed. Using point-of-care Fourier Transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR-S), we tested a drug sample from each participant onsite and confirmed the results offsite at a laboratory. Results were conveyed in real-time, along with harm reduction education, referrals to resources and care. Results: Virtually all participants (99.2 %) wanted to avoid xylazine exposure. Half (51.2 %) knew what xylazine was, and a quarter (26.1 %) suspected previous exposure. Xylazine exposure was primarily surmised through sedating (45.2 %) and ulcerative (29.0 %) effects. Only 8.8 % of participants submitted a sample that they expected to contain xylazine. Xylazine was detected in 14.5 % of samples using FTIR-S and in 21.4 % of samples using a dual laboratory approach of gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography quadrupole-time-of-flight mass spectrometry (LC-QTOF-MS). Participants thought that these xylazine-positive samples were fentanyl (78.3 %), heroin (13.0 %), or Percocet® (8.7 %). Conclusion: Implementing point-of-care DCS at harm reduction organizations could be useful in rapidly increasing xylazine awareness and engaging at-risk individuals in prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and rapid care for xylazine-related wounds.

Rapid HIV testing for individuals on probation/parole: outcomes of an intervention trial.

Many probationers and parolees do not receive HIV testing despite being at increased risk for obtaining and transmitting HIV. A two-group randomized controlled trial was conducted between April, 2011 and May, 2012 at probation/parole offices in Baltimore, Maryland and Providence/Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Male and female probationers/parolees were interviewed (n = 1,263) and then offered HIV testing based on random assignment to one of two conditions: (1) On-site rapid HIV testing conducted at the probation/parole office; or (2) Referral for rapid HIV testing off site at a community HIV testing clinic. Outcomes were: (1) undergoing HIV testing; and (2) receipt of HIV testing results. Participants were significantly more likely to be tested on-site at a probation/parole office versus off-site at a HIV testing clinic (p < 0.001). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of receiving HIV testing results. Findings indicate that probationers/parolees are willing to be tested on-site and, independent of testing location, are equally willing to receive their results. Implications for expanding rapid HIV testing to more criminal justice related locations and populations are discussed.

Prescribe to Save Lives: An Intervention to Increase Naloxone Prescribing Among HIV Clinicians.

OBJECTIVES: Overdose is a major cause of preventable death among persons living with HIV. This study aimed to increase HIV clinicians' naloxone prescribing, which can reduce overdose mortality. METHODS: We enrolled 22 Ryan White-funded HIV practices and implemented onsite, peer-to-peer training, posttraining academic detailing, and pharmacy peer-to-peer contact around naloxone prescribing in a nonrandomized stepped wedge design. Human immunodeficiency virus clinicians completed surveys to assess attitudes toward prescribing naloxone at preintervention and 6 and 12 months postintervention. Aggregated electronic health record data measured the number of patients with HIV prescribed and the number of HIV clinicians prescribing naloxone by site over the study period. Models controlled for calendar time and clustering of repeated measures among individuals and sites. RESULTS: Of 122 clinicians, 119 (98%) completed a baseline survey, 111 (91%) a 6-month survey, and 93 (76%) a 12-month survey. The intervention was associated with increases in self-reported "high likelihood" to prescribe naloxone (odds ratio [OR], 4.1 [1.7-9.4]; P = 0.001). Of 22 sites, 18 (82%) provided usable electronic health record data that demonstrated a postintervention increase in the total number of clinicians who prescribed naloxone (incidence rate ratio, 2.9 [1.1-7.6]; P = 0.03) and no significant effects on sites having at least one clinician who prescribed naloxone (OR, 4.1 [0.7-23.8]; P = 0.11). The overall proportion of all HIV patients prescribed naloxone modestly increased from 0.97% to 1.6% (OR, 2.2 [0.7-6.8]; P = 0.16). CONCLUSION: On-site, practice-based, peer-to-peer training with posttraining academic detailing was a modestly effective strategy to increase HIV clinicians' prescribing of naloxone.

A randomized trial of methadone initiation prior to release from incarceration.

Individuals who use heroin and illicit opioids are at high risk for infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other blood-borne pathogens, as well as incarceration. The purpose of the randomized trial reported here is to compare outcomes between participants who initiated methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) prior to release from incarceration, with those who were referred to treatment at the time of release. Participants who initiated MMT prior to release were significantly more likely to enter treatment postrelease (P < .001) and for participants who did enter treatment, those who received MMT prerelease did so within fewer days (P = .03). They also reported less heroin use (P = .008), other opiate use (P = .09), and injection drug use (P = .06) at 6 months. Initiating MMT in the weeks prior to release from incarceration is a feasible and effective way to improve MMT access postrelease and to decrease relapse to opioid use.

Prescribe to Save Lives: Improving Buprenorphine Prescribing Among HIV Clinicians.

BACKGROUND: HIV clinicians are uniquely positioned to treat their patients with opioid use disorder using buprenorphine to prevent overdose death. The Prescribe to Save Lives (PtSL) study aimed to increase HIV clinicians' buprenorphine prescribing via an overdose prevention intervention. METHODS: The quasi-experimental stepped-wedge study enrolled 22 Ryan White-funded HIV clinics and delivered a peer-to-peer training to clinicians with follow-up academic detailing that included overdose prevention education and introduced buprenorphine prescribing. Site-aggregated electronic medical record (EMR) data measured with the change in X-waivered clinicians and patients prescribed buprenorphine. Clinicians completed surveys preintervention and at 6- and 12-month postintervention that assessed buprenorphine training, prescribing, and attitudes. Analyses applied generalized estimating equation models, adjusting for time and clustering of repeated measures among individuals and sites. RESULTS: Nineteen sites provided EMR prescribing data, and 122 clinicians returned surveys. Of the total patients with HIV across all sites, EMR data showed 0.38% were prescribed buprenorphine pre-intervention and 0.52% were prescribed buprenorphine postintervention. The intervention increased completion of a buprenorphine training course (adjusted odds ratio 2.54, 95% confidence interval: 1.38 to 4.68, P = 0.003) and obtaining an X-waiver (adjusted odds ratio 2.11, 95% confidence interval: 1.12 to 3.95, P = 0.02). There were nonsignificant increases at the clinic level, as well. CONCLUSIONS: Although the PtSL intervention resulted in increases in buprenorphine training and prescriber certification, there was no meaningful increase in buprenorphine prescribing. Engaging and teaching HIV clinicians about overdose and naloxone rescue may facilitate training in buprenorphine prescribing but will not result in more treatment with buprenorphine without additional interventions.

Factors associated with opioid-involved overdose among previously incarcerated people in the U.S.: A community engaged narrative review.

BACKGROUND: People with a history of incarceration are at high risk for opioid overdose. A variety of factors contribute to this elevated risk though our understanding of these factors is deficient. Research to identify risk and protective factors for overdose is often conducted using administrative data or researcher-derived surveys and without explicit input from people with lived experience. We aimed to understand the scope of U.S. research on factors associated with opioid overdose among previously incarcerated people. We did this by conducting a narrative review of the literature and convening expert panels of people with lived experience. We then categorized these factors using a social determinants of health framework to help contextualize our findings. METHODS: We first conducted a narrative review of the published literature. A search was performed using PubMed and APA PsycInfo. We then convened two expert panels consisting of people with lived experience and people who work with people who were previously incarcerated. Experts were asked to evaluate the literature derived factors for completeness and add factors that were not identified. Finally, we categorized factors as either intermediary or structural according to the World Health Organization's Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) Framework. RESULTS: We identified 13 papers that met our inclusion criteria for the narrative review. Within these 13 papers, we identified 22 relevant factors for their role in the relationship between overdose and people with a history of incarceration, 16 were risk factors and six were protective factors. Five of these were structural factors (three risk and two protective) and 17 were intermediary factors (13 risk and four protective). The expert panels identified 21 additional factors, 10 of which were structural (six risk and four protective) and 11 of which were intermediary (eight risk and three protective). CONCLUSION: This narrative review along with expert panels demonstrates a gap in the published literature regarding factors associated with overdose among people who were previously incarcerated. Additionally, this review highlights a substantial gap with regard to the types of factors that are typically identified. Incorporating voices of people with lived experience is crucial to our understanding of overdose in this at-risk population.

Leveraging COVID-19 to sustain regulatory flexibility in the treatment of opioid use disorder.

The U.S. government declared the opioid epidemic as a national public health emergency in 2017, but regulatory frameworks that govern the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) through pharmaceutical interventions have remained inflexible. The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has effectively removed regulatory restrictions that experts in the field of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) have been proposing for decades and has expanded access to care. The regulatory flexibilities implemented to avoid unnecessary COVID-related death must be made permanent to ensure that improved access to evidence-based treatment remains available to vulnerable individuals with OUD who otherwise face formidable barriers to MOUD. We must seize this moment of COVOD-19 regulatory flexibilities to demonstrate the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of delivering treatment for OUD through a low-threshold approach.

Effect of Case Management on HIV Outcomes for Community Corrections Population: Results of an 18-Month Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based interventions that engage community-dwelling, justice-involved, people living with HIV (PLWH) in care are urgently needed. Project Bridge, an intensive case management intervention, has demonstrated efficacy for linking PLWH to care transitioning from prison to the community. We assessed whether a modified Project Bridge model was effective for increasing rates of HIV treatment engagement, antiretroviral therapy receipt, and adherence for community-dwelling individuals supervised on probation and parole. SETTING: Baltimore, Maryland. METHODS: In this study, the 18-month outcomes of a randomized controlled trial in which PLWH were also on probation or parole received either Project Bridge (n = 50) or treatment as usual (n = 50) were assessed. HIV treatment engagement (primary outcome), antiretroviral therapy prescription, and adherence (secondary outcomes) are evaluated using the intent-to-treat approach. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in rates of HIV treatment engagement, antiretroviral therapy prescription receipt, or adherence between groups over the 18-month study period. Across groups, participants were 5.6 times more likely to receive HIV care, 5.8 times more likely to receive an antiretroviral therapy prescription, and 4 times more likely to report antiretroviral therapy adherence at each follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Future research is needed to identify potentially less-intensive interventions that target the unique needs of PLWH under community supervision.