Multi-level influences on increased overdose risk behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic among people who use drugs in Rhode Island: a qualitative investigation.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected structurally vulnerable populations including people who use drugs (PWUD). Increased overdose risk behaviors among PWUD during the pandemic have been documented, with research underscoring the role of influencing factors such as isolation and job loss in these behaviors. Here, we use qualitative methods to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and pandemic-related response measures on drug use behaviors in a sample of PWUD in Rhode Island. Using a social-ecological framework, we highlight the nested, interactive levels of the pandemic's influence on increased overdose risk behaviors. METHODS: From July to October 2021, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 PWUD who self-reported any increase in behaviors associated with overdose risk (e.g., increased use, change in drug type and/or more solitary drug use) relative to before the pandemic. Thematic analysis was conducted using a codebook with salient themes identified from interview guides and those that emerged through close reading of transcribed interviews. Guided by a social-ecological framework, themes were grouped into individual, network, institutional, and policy-level influences of the pandemic on drug use behaviors. RESULTS: Individual-level influences on increased overdose risk behaviors included self-reported anxiety and depression, isolation and loneliness, and boredom. Network-level influences included changes in local drug supply and changes in social network composition specific to housing. At the institutional level, drug use patterns were influenced by reduced access to harm reduction or treatment services. At the policy level, increased overdose risk behaviors were related to financial changes, job loss, and business closures. All participants identified factors influencing overdose risk behaviors that corresponded to several nested social-ecological levels. CONCLUSIONS: Participants identified multi-level influences of the COVID-19 pandemic and pandemic-related response measures on their drug use behavior patterns and overdose risk. These findings suggest that effective harm reduction during large-scale crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, must address several levels of influence concurrently.

Characteristics of events in which police responded to overdoses: an examination of incident reports in Rhode Island.

BACKGROUND: Narrow or non-existent Good Samaritan Law protections and harsh drug selling statutes in the USA have been shown to deter bystanders from seeking medical assistance for overdoses. Additionally, little is known about the actions that police take when responding to overdose events. The objectives of this study were to assess the prevalence and correlates of naloxone administration by police, as well as to examine overdose events where arrests were made and those in which the person who overdosed was described as combative. METHODS: We analyzed incident reports of police responding to an overdose between September 1, 2019, and August 31, 2020 (i.e., 6 months prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic), from a city in Rhode Island. We examined characteristics of incidents, as well as individual characteristics of the person who overdosed. Correlates of police naloxone administration were assessed using Wilcoxon rank sum tests and Fisher's exact tests, and we examined incidents where arrests occurred and incidents in which the person who overdosed was described as combative descriptively. RESULTS: Among the 211 incidents in which police responded to an overdose during the study period, we found that police administered naloxone in approximately 10% of incidents. In most incidents, police were the last group of first responders to arrive on scene (59%), and most often, naloxone was administered by others (65%). Police were significantly more likely to administer naloxone when they were the first professionals to arrive, when naloxone had not been administered by others, and when the overdose occurred in public or in a vehicle. Arrests at overdose events were rarely reported (1%), and people who overdosed were rarely (1%) documented in incident reports as being 'combative.' CONCLUSIONS: Considering these findings, ideally, all jurisdictions should have sufficient first responder staffing and resources to ensure a rapid response to overdose events, with police rarely or never dispatched to respond to overdoses. However, until this ideal can be achieved, any available responders should be dispatched concurrently, with police instructed to resume patrol once other professional responders arrive on scene; additionally, warrant searches of persons on scene should be prohibited.

Effect of a Peer-Led Behavioral Intervention for Emergency Department Patients at High Risk of Fatal Opioid Overdose: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Fatal and nonfatal opioid overdoses are at record levels, and emergency department (ED) visits may be an opportune time to intervene. Peer-led models of care are increasingly common; however, little is known about their effectiveness. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a peer-led behavioral intervention compared with the standard behavioral intervention delivered in the ED on engagement in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment within 30 days after the ED encounter. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial recruited 648 patients from 2 EDs from November 15, 2018, to May 31, 2021. Patients were eligible to participate if they were in the ED for an opioid overdose, receiving treatment related to an opioid use disorder, or identified as having had a recent opioid overdose. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive a behavioral intervention from a certified peer recovery specialist (n = 323) or a standard intervention delivered by a hospital-employed licensed clinical social worker (n = 325). A certified peer recovery specialist was someone with at least 2 years of recovery who completed a 45-hour training program and had 500 hours of supervised work experience. After the ED intervention, the certified peer recovery specialists offered continued contact with participants for up to 90 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was receipt of SUD treatment within 30 days of enrollment, assessed with deterministic linkage of statewide administrative databases. Treatment engagement was defined as admission to a formal, publicly licensed SUD treatment program or receipt of office-based medication for opioid use disorder within 30 days of the initial ED visit. Results: Among the 648 participants, the mean (SD) age was 36.9 (10.8) years, and most were male (442 [68.2%]) and White (444 [68.5%]). Receipt of SUD treatment occurred for 103 of 323 participants (32%) in the intervention group vs 98 of 325 participants (30%) in the usual care group within 30 days of the ED visit. Among all participants, the most accessed treatments were outpatient medication for opioid use disorder (buprenorphine, 119 [18.4%]; methadone, 44 [6.8%]) and residential treatment (44 [6.8%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Overall, this study found that a substantial proportion of participants in both groups engaged in SUD treatment within 30 days of the ED visit. An ED-based behavioral intervention is likely effective in promoting treatment engagement, but who delivers the intervention may be less influential on short-term outcomes. Further study is required to determine the effects on longer-term engagement in SUD care and other health outcomes (eg, recurrent overdose). Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03684681.

Drug use behaviors, trauma, and emotional affect following the overdose of a social network member: A qualitative investigation.

BACKGROUND: Scant research has examined the influence of overdoses occurring in social networks (i.e., knowing someone who has overdosed) on individual overdose risk. We sought to characterize drug use behaviors of individuals following the overdose of someone in their social network. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 people who use drugs and knew someone who overdosed in the prior 90 days. All interviews were conducted in person in Rhode Island from July to October 2021. Data were stratified by drug use behaviors following the overdose of a network member (i.e., risk behaviors, protective behaviors, no change; selected a priori) and analyzed using a thematic analysis variation to identify salient themes. RESULTS: We identified variation in the effect of knowing someone who overdosed on subsequent drug use behaviors and emotional affect. Several participants described increasing their drug use or using more types of drugs than usual to manage feelings of bereavement and trauma, and a subset of these participants described increased drug use with suicidal intention and increased suicidal ideations following the overdose event. Other participants described reducing their drug use and engaging in protective behaviors in response to heightened perceived overdose risk, protection motivation (i.e., increased motivation to protect oneself), and concern for others. Additionally, some participants reported no change in drug use behaviors, and these participants described already engaging in harm reduction practices, feeling desensitized due to frequent or repeated exposure to overdose, and ambivalence about living. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a need for enhanced investment in network-based overdose prevention interventions, as well as more robust integration of bereavement support and mental health services in settings that serve people who use drugs. The findings also suggest a need for future research to identify mediators of the effect of overdose occurring in social networks on individual overdose risk.

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.