High Interest in Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment With Hydromorphone Among Urban Syringe Service Program Participants.

BACKGROUND: Injectable opioid agonist treatment with hydromorphone (iOAT-H) is effective for persons who inject drugs (PWID) with opioid use disorder (OUD) but remains unavailable in the United States. Our objective was to determine interest in iOAT-H among syringe services program (SSP) participants. METHODS: We recruited PWID with OUD from SSPs in New York City. Interest in iOAT-H was assessed on a 4-point scale. We compared participants who were and were not interested in iOAT-H regarding sociodemographic characteristics and self-reported variables (past 30 days): heroin use, public injection practices, and participation in illegal activity other than drug possession. Participants reported their preferred OUD treatment and reasons for these preferences. RESULTS: Of 108 participants, most were male (69%), Hispanic (68%), and median age was 42 years. The median number of prior OUD treatment episodes was 6 (interquartile range: 2-12). Most (65%) were interested in iOAT-H. Interested participants (vs not interested) reported, over the prior 30 days, greater heroin use days (mean, 26.4 vs 22.3), injecting in public more times (median, 15 vs 6), and a higher percentage having participated in illegal activity (40% vs 16%). Preferences for OUD treatment were: iOAT-H (43%), methadone (39%), and buprenorphine (9%). Participants who preferred iOAT-H to conventional OUD treatments reported preferring injection as a route of administration and that available OUD treatments helped them insufficiently. CONCLUSIONS: SSP participants with OUD reported high interest in iOAT-H. Participants had attempted conventional treatments but still used heroin almost daily. We identified PWID at risk for opioid-related harms who potentially could benefit from iOAT-H.

Treatment History and Interest in Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment With Hydromorphone Among People Who Inject Drugs.

OBJECTIVES: Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is a novel approach to treating opioid use disorder (OUD) that is typically reserved for treatment-experienced persons who inject drugs (PWID) with long-standing OUD. This study examined PWID's past OUD treatment histories and their attitudes toward iOAT with hydromorphone. METHODS: This cross-sectional study recruited syringe services program participants with OUD in New York City. Participants self-reported past OUD care episodes (detoxification; outpatient, inpatient, or medication treatment; or mutual aid groups) and current interest in iOAT with hydromorphone (assessed on a 4-point scale with 3 or 4 considered "interested"). Participants with 2 or more treatment episodes in the past 5 years were considered treatment-experienced. We examined whether the number of past care episodes was associated with interest in iOAT. RESULTS: Of 108 PWID, most participants were male (68.5%) and Hispanic (68.5%) with a mean age of 43 years (±10.8). Nearly all (98.1%) had severe OUD and had received past OUD care (96.3%), with the mean number of care episodes being 17.4 (SD, ±15.9). Most participants (59.8%) were treatment-experienced. Interest in iOAT with hydromorphone was high (64.8%), but there was no significant association between total past care episodes and expressing interest in iOAT (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.05). CONCLUSION: Participants were highly treatment-experienced, and iOAT interest was high regardless of prior OUD treatment. New OUD treatment options, such as iOAT with hydromorphone, would be welcomed by PWID whose OUD has not remitted with conventional treatment as well as other PWID.

Injecting Alone: Practices and Preferences among People Who Inject Drugs in New York City.

Injecting alone is a suspected risk factor for opioid overdose death among people who inject drugs (PWID). Better understanding of PWID's injecting practices and preferences could guide pragmatic harm reduction and overdose prevention interventions. We investigated injection practices and preferences among PWID attending syringe services programs (SSPs). We surveyed 108 PWID with opioid use disorder from 3 New York City SSPs between November 2020 and August 2021 to ascertain harm reduction service preferences. This secondary analysis examined injection behavior preferences, reasons for these preferences, and self-reported non-fatal lifetime overdoses. Slightly more participants preferred injecting alone (56%) than with someone present (44%), but most in both groups inject alone most of the time (97% vs 52%, p < 0.01). Commonly reported reasons for preferring to inject alone were privacy (82%) and not wanting to be judged (78%), whereas many preferred to inject with others to have someone present in case of overdose (92%), for camaraderie (69%), and to share drugs (65%). Those preferring to inject alone (vs. with someone present) self-reported higher mean number of lifetime overdoses (3.1 vs 2.6), but differences were not statistically significant. In conclusion, most participants injected alone regardless of preference. While not associated with prior non-fatal overdose, injection preference likely carries risk for future overdose. Participants preferred injecting alone to avoid shame or injecting with others in case of overdose, which can inform public health interventions that support both preferences. Reducing stigma while facilitating rapid overdose response can mitigate the risk of fatal overdose.

Onsite buprenorphine inductions at harm reduction agencies to increase treatment engagement and reduce HIV risk: Design and rationale.

BACKGROUND: Despite dramatic increases in opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths, the U.S. has been unable to consistently deliver OUD treatment to those who need it. Syringe services programs (SSPs) can engage an out-of-treatment population of people with OUD that has elevated overdose risk. Buprenorphine treatment is safe and effective, and US regulations allow for prescribing from diverse locations, including SSPs. This study's objective is to test buprenorphine treatment initiation at SSPs. We hypothesize that offering onsite buprenorphine treatment initiation will improve OUD treatment engagement without reducing buprenorphine treatment effectiveness or safety. METHODS: We will recruit 250 out-of-treatment SSP participants with OUD in a large urban area. Participants will be randomized to onsite buprenorphine treatment initiation or enhanced referral. Over 2 weeks, participants in the onsite treatment arm will see a buprenorphine provider twice at the SSP, receive weekly medication packs, and then their care will be transferred to a community health center for treatment continuation. In the control arm, within one week, participants will receive an appointment at the same community health center as in the intervention arm for buprenorphine initiation and continuation. Participants will be assessed with urine drug tests, questionnaires, and medical record review. The primary outcome will be engagement in buprenorphine treatment at 30 days. Secondary outcomes include buprenorphine diversion, opioid-free urine drug tests, and intervention cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: Our study will contribute to the growing literature on SSPs as a conduit to OUD treatment. SSPs hold promise to deliver needed care to people with OUD.

Interest in long-acting injectable buprenorphine among syringe services program participants.

OBJECTIVE: To examine syringe services program (SSP) participants' interest in long-acting injectable buprenorphine. DESIGN: SSP participants completed a 136-item questionnaire by phone. Items assessed quantitative ratings of interest in sublingual and injectable buprenorphine, preference for sublingual versus injectable buprenorphine, and reasons for preferences. SETTING: Two large urban SSPs. PARTICIPANTS: SSP participants ≥18 years of age with current or lifetime opioid use disorder (OUD). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): (1) Interest in sublingual and injectable buprenorphine, respectively, on a scale from 0 to 10 (0 = no interest and 10 = high interest); and (2) preference for sublingual buprenorphine versus injectable buprenorphine. Participants were also asked whether they agreed with statements that presented potential reasons for preferring each formulation. RESULTS: A total of 104 unique participants were interviewed, of which 72 (69 percent) were currently receiving or considering buprenorphine treatment. Among these 72 participants, the median level of interest in starting or continuing sublingual buprenorphine was 8 out of 10 (interquartile range [IQR]: 6-10) and in starting injectable buprenorphine was 5 out of 10 (IQR: 1-9). Thirty-six (50 percent) preferred sublingual, 27 (38 percent) preferred injectable, and 9 (13 percent) preferred neither or declined to answer. Participants who preferred injectable buprenorphine most commonly agreed that the convenience of the monthly injection was the reason for their preference. CONCLUSIONS: Among SSP participants with OUD, we found moderate interest in injectable buprenorphine. Introducing this new form of buprenorphine treatment at SSPs could help meet the needs of individuals who are not well-served by standard OUD treatment models.