"Wanna cry this out real quick?": an examination of secondary traumatic stress risk and resilience among post-overdose outreach staff in Massachusetts.

BACKGROUND: Post-overdose outreach programs engage overdose survivors and their families soon after an overdose event. Staff implementing these programs are routinely exposed to others' trauma, which makes them vulnerable to secondary traumatic stress (STS) and compassion fatigue. The purpose of this study was to explore experiences of STS and associated upstream and downstream risk and protective factors among program staff. METHODS: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of semi-structured interviews with post-overdose outreach program staff in Massachusetts. Transcripts were analyzed using a multi-step hybrid inductive-deductive approach to explore approaches and responses to outreach work, factors that might give rise to STS, and compassion fatigue resilience. Findings were organized according to the three main constructs within Ludick and Figley's compassion fatigue resilience model (empathy, secondary traumatic stress, and compassion fatigue resilience). RESULTS: Thirty-eight interviews were conducted with staff from 11 post-overdose outreach programs in Massachusetts. Within the empathy construct, concern for others' well-being emerged as a motivator to engage in post-overdose outreach work - with staff trying to understand others' perspectives and using this connection to deliver respectful and compassionate services. Within the secondary traumatic stress construct, interviewees described regular and repeated exposure to others' trauma - made more difficult when exposures overlapped with staff members' personal social spheres. Within the compassion fatigue resilience construct, interviewees described the presence and absence of self-care practices and routines, social supports, and workplace supports. Job satisfaction and emotional detachment from work experiences also arose as potential protective factors. Interviewees reported inconsistent presence and utilization of formal support for STS and compassion fatigue within their post-overdose outreach teams. CONCLUSION: Post-overdose outreach program staff may experience secondary traumatic stress and may develop compassion fatigue, particularly in the absence of resilience and coping strategies and support. Compassion fatigue resilience approaches for post-overdose outreach staff warrant further development and study.

Pharmacy staff-reported adaptations to naloxone provision and over-the-counter (OTC) syringe sales during the COVID-19 pandemic: Experiences across multiple states and 2 pharmacy chains.

BACKGROUND: Access to harm reduction materials was greatly disrupted during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Community pharmacies often continued provision of harm reduction materials as part of their usual operations during the pandemic, but little is known about what, if any, adaptations were made and the perceived impact of these actions from the perspective of pharmacy staff. OBJECTIVES: We explored how pharmacy staff across 4 states in 2 major pharmacy chains adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic for ongoing naloxone and over-the-counter (OTC) syringe access and how staff perceived the pandemic affected drug use in the community they served and their pharmacy's volume of syringe sales and naloxone provision. METHODS: We analyzed 134 pharmacy staff responses to a 12-month follow-up assessment for an educational intervention conducted in 2 pharmacy chains in Oregon, Washington, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. Respondents answered closed- and open-ended questions collected online from July 2020 to February 2022. Questions measured prevalence of adaptations and perceived uptake of naloxone and OTC syringe services. Descriptive statistics summarized adaptations and perceived impact and chi-square tests explored differences by state and pharmacy chain. Open-ended responses were reviewed and analyzed to identify summary points and themes. RESULTS: With few differences by state or pharmacy chain detected, pharmacy staff reported more naloxone mailing, requests by phone, streamlined counseling, and drive-thru provision adaptations to OTC syringe sales and naloxone provision during the pandemic. Most staff perceived adaptations as increasing or maintaining naloxone provision and OTC syringe sales. Respondents described specific aspects of the pharmacy that contributed to successful adaptations, including tailoring to specific product demand, inventory levels, drive-thru access, and a perception of extraordinary public health need at a time of and in places affected by the opioid crisis. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy OTC syringe and naloxone access continued during the COVID-19 pandemic through streamlining workflows and innovating no-contact harm reduction services, reinforcing pharmacy's public health role.

The association between naloxone claims and proportion of independent vs. chain pharmacies: A longitudinal analysis of naloxone claims in the US.

BACKGROUND: Expanding access to naloxone through pharmacies is an important policy goal. Our objective was to characterize national county-level naloxone dispensing of chain versus independent pharmacies. METHODS: The primary exposure in our longitudinal analysis was the proportion of chain pharmacies in a county, identified through the US Department of Homeland Security 2010 Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data. We defined counties as having "higher proportion" of chain pharmacies if at least 50% of pharmacies were large national chains. The primary outcome was quarter-year (2016Q1-2019Q2) rate of pharmacy naloxone claims per 100,000 persons from Symphony Health at the county-level. We compared the naloxone dispensing rate between county types using two-sample t-tests. We estimated the association between county-level chain pharmacy proportion and rate of naloxone claims using a linear model with year-quarter fixed effects. RESULTS: Nearly one third of counties (n=946) were higher proportion. Higher proportion counties had a significantly higher rate of naloxone claims across the study period, in 4 of 6 urban-rural classifications, and in counties with and without naloxone access laws. The linear model confirmed that higher proportion counties had a significantly higher rate of naloxone claims, adjusting for urban/rural designation, income, population characteristics, opioid mortality rate, co-prescribing laws and naloxone access laws. CONCLUSION: In this national study, we found an association between naloxone dispensing rates and the county-level proportion of chain (versus independent) pharmacies. Incentivizing naloxone dispensing through educational, regulatory, or legal efforts may improve naloxone availability and dispensing rates - particularly in counties with proportionately high numbers of independent pharmacies.

Racial/ethnic differences in receipt of naloxone distributed by opioid overdose prevention programs in New York City.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated racial/ethnic differences in the receipt of naloxone distributed by opioid overdose prevention programs (OOPPs) in New York City (NYC). METHODS: We used naloxone recipient racial/ethnic data collected by OOPPs from April 2018 to March 2019. We aggregated quarterly neighborhood-specific rates of naloxone receipt and other covariates to 42 NYC neighborhoods. We used a multilevel negative binomial regression model to assess the relationship between neighborhood-specific naloxone receipt rates and race/ethnicity. Race/ethnicity was stratified into four mutually exclusive groups: Latino, non-Latino Black, non-Latino White, and non-Latino Other. We also conducted racial/ethnic-specific geospatial analyses to assess whether there was within-group geographic variation in naloxone receipt rates for each racial/ethnic group. RESULTS: Non-Latino Black residents had the highest median quarterly naloxone receipt rate of 41.8 per 100,000 residents, followed by Latino residents (22.0 per 100,000), non-Latino White (13.6 per 100,000) and non-Latino Other residents (13.3 per 100,000). In our multivariable analysis, compared with non-Latino White residents, non-Latino Black residents had a significantly higher receipt rate, and non-Latino Other residents had a significantly lower receipt rate. In the geospatial analyses, both Latino and non-Latino Black residents had the most within-group geographic variation in naloxone receipt rates compared to non-Latino White and Other residents. CONCLUSIONS: This study found significant racial/ethnic differences in naloxone receipt from NYC OOPPs. We observed substantial variation in naloxone receipt for non-Latino Black and Latino residents across neighborhoods, indicating relatively poorer access in some neighborhoods and opportunities for new approaches to address geographic and structural barriers in these locations.

Research Priorities for Expansion of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in the Community Pharmacy.

In the last decade, the U.S. opioid overdose crisis has magnified, particularly since the introduction of synthetic opioids, including fentanyl. Despite the benefits of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), only about a fifth of people with opioid use disorder (OUD) in the U.S. receive MOUD. The ubiquity of pharmacists, along with their extensive education and training, represents great potential for expansion of MOUD services, particularly in community pharmacies. The National Institute on Drug Abuse's National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (NIDA CTN) convened a working group to develop a research agenda to expand OUD treatment in the community pharmacy sector to support improved access to MOUD and patient outcomes. Identified settings for research include independent and chain pharmacies and co-located pharmacies within primary care settings. Specific topics for research included adaptation of pharmacy infrastructure for clinical service provision, strategies for interprofessional collaboration including health service models, drug policy and regulation, pharmacist education about OUD and OUD treatment, including didactic, experiential, and interprofessional curricula, and educational interventions to reduce stigma towards this patient population. Together, expanding these research areas can bring effective MOUD to where it is most needed.

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.

Perceptions, policies, and practices related to dispensing buprenorphine for opioid use disorder: A national survey of community-based pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: Increasing buprenorphine prescribing for opioid use disorder (OUD) has been a major focus of U.S. opioid response efforts. However, concerns related to dispensing buprenorphine have been identified among pharmacists. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe perceptions, policies, and practices reported by community-based pharmacists in relation to dispensing buprenorphine for OUD and to compare these responses by practice setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was administered to a random sample of 6376 pharmacists. Responses were collected anonymously from October 16, 2021, to November 7, 2021. RESULTS: A response rate of 5.1% was achieved with 325 responders, and 281 were eligible to complete the survey. Most reported practicing in a chain (50.9%) or independent pharmacy (34.7%) as a staff pharmacist (39.7%) or pharmacist-in-charge (37.0%). Most (68.1%) indicated they could usually or always fill a buprenorphine prescription promptly. The most common pharmacy policies related to buprenorphine dispensing were checking the prescription drug monitoring program (71.3%), validating the prescriber's X-waiver (44.9%), accepting only local prescribers (37.4%), and prohibiting refills more than one day early (35.8%). Policies limiting buprenorphine access to local prescribers, local patients, and established patients varied by practice setting and were most common in independent pharmacies. The strongest barriers to buprenorphine dispensing were insurance prior authorization, difficulty reaching prescribers with questions, and concerns about buprenorphine diversion. The strongest facilitators of buprenorphine dispensing were increased communication with prescribers, increased trust with prescribers, increased trust with patients, and increased education for pharmacists. CONCLUSION: Most respondents indicated they were willing and able to dispense buprenorphine products for OUD promptly. However, they also reported discomfort dispensing when factors representing potential risk of diversion are present. Mitigating this hypersensitivity to diversion risk among pharmacists should be a focus of regulatory agencies and professional organizations. Efforts to address the unique concerns of independent pharmacists will also be essential to improve access.

"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.

Readiness of community pharmacies to implement an opioid safety intervention.

BACKGROUND: We report on efforts to measure readiness to adopt opioid safety initiatives in community pharmacies within 2 large chains. Previous studies identified lack of knowledge, confidence, or enthusiasm in addressing harm reduction efforts. We implemented an intervention that provided training to improve opioid safety. The goal was to increase naloxone prescribing and nonprescription syringe sales, reduce stigma, and decrease opioid overdoses among patients and customers. OBJECTIVES: To assess pharmacy readiness for intervention delivery, by characterizing pharmacy culture around opioid safety; describing current practices and challenges interacting with patients and customers on naloxone, nonprescription syringe sales, and buprenorphine; and determining pharmacy defined goals for implementing the intervention. METHODS: The sample included pharmacy managers and staff pharmacists from 2 large chains who completed a brief phone interview. Interviews consisted of Likert-scale and open-ended, theoretically driven questions. Questions focused on workplace culture, patient engagement, naloxone and buprenorphine prescribing, nonprescription syringe sales, and intervention goals. Coding categories for the open-ended questions were derived using a thematic review of responses. RESULTS: A total of 163 respondents described both workplace culture and how they encourage patient opioid safety as including public health awareness, patient engagement, and naloxone prescribing. Sale of nonprescription syringes exhibited high variability: no sales barriers (53.9%), sales with barriers (21.5%), and no sales (20.9%). Half of pharmacists (50.3%) interacted with buprenorphine prescribers outside of medication fills. Most respondents (68.7%) endorsed being ready to promote the intervention. Pharmacists named goals in adopting the intervention of wanting more knowledge and educational materials, talking points with patients, and best practices for offering naloxone. CONCLUSION: Community pharmacists, before implementation, described awareness of and receptiveness to opioid safety initiatives, with substantial barriers around nonprescription syringe sales. Assessed knowledge level, culture, and identified barriers that emerged in the readiness assessments can be used to tailor future pharmacy-specific programming.

Implementation of an academic detailing intervention to increase naloxone distribution and foster engagement in harm reduction from the community clinician.

BACKGROUND: Respond to Prevent (R2P) is a randomized clinical trial which sought to accelerate distribution of naloxone and other harm reduction materials from community pharmacies. R2P combined an online continuing education course with in-store materials, specifically designed for use in community pharmacies, and then supported implementation through the one-on-one educational technique of academic detailing. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to describe and synthesize our experiences providing academic detailing as part of the R2P randomized trial. METHODS: Closed-ended items from standardized post detailing questionnaires were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Open-ended items were content analyzed for key themes using immersion-crystallization qualitative methods. RESULTS: A total of 176 pharmacies participated in R2P with 175 receiving their initial academic detailing visit between August 2019 and May 2021. Initial visits were in-person and lasted a median of 35 minutes (interquartile range, 20-45 minutes). The R2P naloxone guide was the most common topic covered (n = 162, 92.6%). Following a fidelity check to assess adequacy of the R2P program implementation, 80 pharmacies (45.7%) required secondary academic detailing. Secondary detailing was more targeted and most frequently focused on the sale of nonprescription syringes (n = 28; 35.2%) or disposal container distribution (n = 30; 37.5%). Analysis of the open-ended items identified factors that the detailers perceived to affect the quality of academic detailing sessions, including the pharmacy environment, participant knowledge of and attitudes toward the subject matter, and ability of the detailer to remain flexible yet consistent. CONCLUSION: R2P provided a standardized process to foster naloxone distribution and engagement in harm reduction with demonstrated implementation in 175 community pharmacies across 4 states. Academic detailing was perceived to be well-received and effective at providing education and promoting distribution of naloxone and nonprescription syringes in community pharmacies. Additional research is needed to confirm these perceptions through evaluation post-intervention behavioral and attitude changes.

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.

Pharmacy on-site overdose protocols and prevention of overdose.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose is a preventable injury leading to high morbidity and premature mortality in communities across the United States. Overdoses take place where people use drugs, including commercial and public locations like community pharmacies, and necessitate swift detection and response to avoid harm and, even more seriously, death. The presence of emergency and safety protocols improves occupational health and safety for all in the workplace. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of experience with on-site pharmacy overdose and to explore pharmacist and site characteristics associated with having a known protocol for responding to on-site overdose emergencies.Methods: An anonymous, online survey about naloxone provision and opioid safety was delivered by email, through professional pharmacy associations and continuing education attendance lists, to 3,100 pharmacists in Massachusetts and Rhode Island between October 2017 and January 2018. Survey items gauged socio-demographics, practice site characteristics, safer opioid dispensing and naloxone provision. Summary statistics and bivariate analyses were conducted to describe characteristics associated with items pertaining to on-site overdose policy awareness.Results: Of the 357 respondents (11.5% response rate), 154 (5.0%) answered the questions of interest: 17.5% reported having at least one suspected overdose on-site at their practice location, while 42.9% reported that they were knowledgeable about and could locate at their practice location an on-site overdose protocol detailing how to respond to an overdose. Pharmacists who were knowledgeable about protocols were also more likely to offer naloxone to patients (p = 0.02) and did not practice at a chain pharmacy (p = 0.01).Conclusions: Community pharmacies that stock and distribute naloxone are key parts of community efforts to address the opioid crisis. Pharmacies and other healthcare settings should develop and implement on-site overdose response protocols and cultivate a norm of naloxone provision to patients.

Understanding opioid overdose risk and response preparedness among people who use cocaine and other drugs: Mixed-methods findings from a large, multi-city study.

Background: Fatal overdoses involving cocaine (powdered or crack) and fentanyl have increased nationally and in Massachusetts. It is unclear how overdose risk and preparedness to respond to an overdose differs by patterns of cocaine and opioid use. Methods: From 2017 to 2019, we conducted a nine-community mixed-methods study of Massachusetts residents who use drugs. Using survey data from 465 participants with past-month cocaine and/or opioid use, we examined global differences (p < 0.05) in overdose risk and response preparedness by patterns of cocaine and opioid use. Qualitative interviews (n = 172) contextualized survey findings. Results: The majority of the sample (66%) used cocaine and opioids in the past month; 18.9% used opioids alone; 9.2% used cocaine and had no opioid use history; and 6.2% used cocaine and had an opioid use history. Relative to those with a current/past history of opioid use, significantly fewer of those with no opioid use history were aware of fentanyl in the drug supply, carried naloxone, and had received naloxone training. Qualitative interviews documented how people who use cocaine and have no history of opioid use are largely unprepared to recognize and respond to an overdose. Conclusions: Public health efforts are needed to increase fentanyl awareness and overdose prevention preparedness among people primarily using cocaine.

Alternative use of buprenorphine among people who use opioids in three U.S. Cities.

Background: Buprenorphine is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder, yet some persons are concerned with its "alternative use" (i.e., any use unintended by the prescriber). There is limited evidence on the factors associated with alternative use of buprenorphine (AUB); in this study, we examined correlates of recent (past 6 months) AUB. Methods: Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze survey data from a multi-site, cross-sectional study of people who use drugs (PWUD) (N = 334) in Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; and Providence, Rhode Island. Results: One-fifth (20%) of the sample reported recent AUB. In adjusted analyses, significant negative correlates of AUB were female gender (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.48, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.24-0.95), recent emergency room visit (aOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.89), and recent injection drug use (aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19-0.88). Significant positive correlates were alternative use of other prescription opioids (aOR 8.32, 95% CI 4.22-16.38), three or more overdoses in the past year (aOR 3.74, 95% CI 1.53-9.17), recent buprenorphine use as prescribed (aOR 2.50, 95% CI 1.12-5.55), and recent residential rehabilitation treatment (aOR 3.71, 95% CI 1.50-9.16). Conclusions: Structural and behavioral correlates of AUB may help identify PWUD at high risk of overdose with unmet treatment needs.

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.

Pharmacists' experiences with a statewide naloxone standing order program in Massachusetts: a mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVES: In a prior statewide naloxone purchase trial conducted in Massachusetts, we documented a high rate of naloxone dispensing under the state's standing order program. The purpose of this study was to understand the factors that facilitate naloxone access under the Massachusetts naloxone standing order (NSO) program and identify any remaining barriers amenable to intervention. DESIGN: Mixed methods design involving a pharmacist survey and 3 pharmacist focus groups. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Focus groups were conducted at 3 separate professional conferences for pharmacists (n = 27). The survey was conducted among Massachusetts pharmacists (n = 339) working at a stratified random sample chain and independent retail pharmacies across Massachusetts. All data were collected between September 2018 and November 2019. OUTCOME MEASURES: Facilitators and barriers to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing and pharmacists' attitudes and beliefs regarding naloxone and opioid use. RESULTS: Most pharmacists described NSO implementation as being straightforward, although differences were reported by pharmacy type in both the survey and focus groups. Facilitators included centralized implementation at chain pharmacies, access to Web-based resources, regularly stocking naloxone, and use of naloxone-specific intake forms. Barriers included patient confidentiality concerns and payment/cost issues. Only 31% of surveyed pharmacists reported always providing naloxone counseling; the most commonly cited barriers were perceived patient discomfort (21%) and time limitations (14%). Confidential space was also more of a concern for independent (vs. chain) pharmacists (18% vs. 6%, P = 0.008). A majority of pharmacists held supportive attitudes toward naloxone, although some reported having moral/ethical concerns about naloxone provision. CONCLUSION: We documented several facilitators to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing. Areas for improvement include addressing stigma and misconceptions around opioids and naloxone use. These remain important targets for improving pharmacy-based naloxone dispensing, although our overall positive results suggest Massachusetts' experience with NSO implementation can inform other states' efforts to expand pharmacy-based naloxone access.

Pharmacy naloxone codispensing: A mixed methods study of practices and perspectives under a statewide standing order program.

BACKGROUND: In a previous statewide naloxone purchase trial conducted in Massachusetts, we documented high levels of naloxone accessibility, upon patient request, under the state's naloxone standing order (NSO) program. Equally important for reducing overdose mortality rates is expanding naloxone access via codispensing alongside opioid prescription and syringe purchases at pharmacies. OBJECTIVE: To understand naloxone codispensing from the perspective of pharmacists under the Massachusetts NSO program. METHODS: The study used a mixed methods design involving 3 focus groups and a quantitative survey. Participants in both the focus groups (N = 27) and survey (N = 339) were licensed Massachusetts pharmacists. Focus groups were conducted at 3 separate professional conferences for pharmacists. The survey was conducted using a stratified random sample of 400 chain and independent retail pharmacies across Massachusetts. All data were collected between September 2018 and November 2019. Quantitative and qualitative analyses examined current policies, practices, and attitudes regarding naloxone codispensing for patients at risk of opioid overdose. RESULTS: Most pharmacists (69%) reported that they, their pharmacy, or both promoted codispensing alongside opioid prescriptions. A majority promoting naloxone codispensing did so for patients prescribed high opioid dosages (80%); fewer promoted codispensing for patients also prescribed benzodiazepines (20%). Facilitators to codispensing were pre-existing relationships between pharmacists and prescribers, mandatory pharmacist consultation, and universal naloxone promotion to all patients meeting certain criteria. Barriers to codispensing were pharmacists' concerns about offending patients by initiating a conversation about naloxone, insufficient technician training, workflow and resource constraints, and misconceptions surrounding naloxone. We found no substantive differences in outcomes between chain and independent pharmacies. CONCLUSION: We documented several facilitators and barriers to naloxone codispensing in Massachusetts pharmacies. Areas amenable to intervention include increased training for front-line pharmacy technicians, mandatory pharmacist consultation for opioid-prescribed patients, workflow reorganization, and addressing stigma concerns on the pharmacist end.

Law Enforcement and Community Provision of Fentanyl Test Strips to People Who Use Drugs for Engagement and Referral to Services.

Use of fentanyl test strips (FTS) to test illicit drugs has been shown to be an effective harm-reduction tool for raising awareness of fentanyl risks, increased self-efficacy to prevent overdose, and safer use behavior changes. From March to June 2020, a total of 6 Massachusetts municipal police departments piloted FTS kit distribution during post-overdose outreach visits, community outreach, and related programming. The Police Assisted Addiction and Recovery Initiative developed the kits, trained departments, and oversaw implementation. The pilot evaluation involved site observations, process measures, and interviews with staff and kit recipients. For every kit distributed, there was approximately 1 health or support service or referral provided; 320 kits were distributed. Key themes from interviews were conceptualizing FTS as a tool, collaborations, and adaptations. Police departments that partnered with community programs amplified project reach. FTS distribution is a simple yet powerful tool that community providers and police can offer alongside linkage to care services and engagement with people who use drugs and their family and friends.

Implementation and Uptake of the Massachusetts Drug Supply Data Stream: A Statewide Public Health-Public Safety Partnership Drug Checking Program.

CONTEXT: The illicit drug supply is rapidly evolving. Equally important to gathering drug supply data for monitoring is timely sharing of information with people who use drugs, the providers who care for them, law enforcement partners, and public health stakeholders so that efforts to avoid harmful substances, take preventive actions, and better target interventions can occur. PROGRAM: The Massachusetts Drug Supply Data Stream (MADDS) is the country's first statewide community drug checking program. Founded on public health-public safety partnerships, MADDS collects remnant drug packaging and paraphernalia with residue from people who use drugs and noncriminal samples from partnering police departments. MADDS tests samples using simultaneous immunoassay fentanyl test strips, Fourier-transform infrared spectrometry (FTIR), and off-site laboratory testing by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS). Results are accessible to community programs and municipalities, while trend analyses inform public health for cross-site alerts and informational bulletins. IMPLEMENTATION: MADDS was launched statewide in 2020 and rapidly expanded to a multisite program. Program staff approached communities and met with municipal police and community partners to secure written agreements to host drug checking. Community partners designed sample collection consistent with their pandemic era workflows. Consultations with stakeholders gathered feedback on design and deliverables. EVALUATION: The program tests sample donations on-site from community agencies and police departments, incorporates review by a medical toxicologist for health and safety concerns, crafts stakeholder-specific communications, and disseminates English, Spanish, and Portuguese language materials. For 2020, a total of 427 samples were tested, of which 47.1% were positive for fentanyl. By early 2021, MADDS detected shifts in cocaine purity, alerted communities of a new toxic fentanyl analogue and a synthetic cannabinoid contaminant, and confirmed the increase of xylazine (a veterinary sedative) in Massachusetts. DISCUSSION: Community drug checking programs can be collaboratively designed with public health and public safety to generate critical health and safety information for people who use drugs and the communities where they live.