Structural competency in the post-prison period for people who inject drugs: A qualitative case study.

INTRODUCTION: Access to services is key to successful community (re-)integration following release from prison. But many people experience disengagement from services, including people who inject drugs (PWID). We use a case study approach and the notion of structural competency to examine influences on access to services among a group of PWID recently released from prison. METHODS: This qualitative study recruited participants from SuperMIX, (a longitudinal cohort study in Victoria, Australia). INCLUSION CRITERIA: aged 18+; lifetime history of injecting drug use; incarcerated for > three months and released from custody < 12 months previously. From 48 participants, five case studies were selected as emblematic of the complex and intersecting factors occurring at the time participants missed an appointment at a service. RESULTS: Numerous, concurrent, and interdependent structural influences in participants' lives coincided with their difficulty accessing and maintaining contact with services and resulted in missed appointments. The key factors involved in the cases presented here include policies around opioid agonist treatment, inadequate, unsuitable and unsafe housing, the management of mental health and side effects of treatment, the lack of social support or estrangement from family, and economic hardship. The support available from service workers to navigate these structural issues was inconsistent. One dissenting case is examined in which missing appointments is anticipated and accommodated. CONCLUSIONS: A case study approach enabled a holistic and in-depth examination of upstream structural elements that intersect with limited social and economic resources to exacerbate the challenges of community re-entry. These results highlight structural issues that have a disproportionate impact on the choices and opportunities for PWID. The incorporation of a structural competency framework in design of services and in staff training could support person-centred and coordinated service provision that take into account PWID's experiences post-release to overcome structural barriers to service engagement.

Differences in polysubstance use patterns and drug-related outcomes between people who inject drugs receiving and not receiving opioid substitution therapies.

AIMS: To test if polysubstance use profiles and drug-related outcomes differ between those receiving and not receiving opioid substitution therapies (OST) among people who inject drugs (PWID). DESIGN: An annual cross-sectional, sentinel sample of PWID across Australia. SETTING: Data came from 3 years (2011-13) of the Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2673 participants who injected drugs from the combined national IDRS samples of 2011 (n = 868), 2012 (n = 922) and 2013 (n = 883). MEASUREMENTS: Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to summarize participants' self-reported use of 18 types of substances, with the resulting polysubstance use profiles then associated with participant experience of a number of drug-related outcomes. FINDINGS: Polysubstance use profiles exhibiting a broad range of substance use were generally at increased risk of negative drug-related outcomes, whether or not participants were receiving OST, including thrombosis among OST receivers [odds ratio (OR) = 2.13, 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 1.09-4.17], injecting with used needles among OST receivers and non-receivers, respectively (OR = 2.78, 95% CI = 1.50-5.13; OR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.34-3.45) and violent criminal offences among OST receivers and non-receivers, respectively (OR =2.30, 95% CI = 1.16-4.58; OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.14-3.07). An important exception was non-fatal overdose which was related specifically to a class of PWID who were not receiving OST and used morphine frequently (OR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.06-3.17) CONCLUSION: Regardless of opioid substitution therapies usage, people who inject drugs who use a broad-range of substances experience greater levels of injecting-related injuries and poorer health outcomes and are more likely to engage in criminal activity than other groups of people who inject drugs.