A qualitative study on perceptions and experiences of overdose among people who smoke drugs in Vancouver, British Columbia.

BACKGROUND: Smoking unregulated drugs has increased substantially in British Columbia. Intersecting with the ongoing overdose crisis, drug smoking-related overdose fatalities have correspondingly surged. However, little is known about the experiences of overdose among people who smoke drugs accessing the toxic drug supply. This study explores perceptions and experiences of overdose among people who smoke drugs. METHODS: We conducted interviews with 31 people who smoke drugs. Interviews covered a range of topics including overdose experience. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes related to participant perceptions and experiences of smoking-related overdose. RESULTS: Some participants perceived smoking drugs to pose lower overdose risk relative to injecting drugs. Participants reported smoking-related overdose experiences, including from underestimating the potency of drugs, the cross-contamination of stimulants with opioids, and responding to smoking-related overdose events. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the impact the unpredictable, unregulated, and toxic drug supply is having on people who smoke drugs, both among people who use opioids, and among those who primarily use stimulants. Efforts to address smoking-related overdose could benefit from expanding supervised smoking sites, working with people who use drugs to disseminate accurate knowledge around smoking-related overdose risk, and offering a smokable alternative to the unpredictable drug supply.

"The machine doesn't judge": Counternarratives on surveillance among people accessing a safer opioid supply via biometric machines.

People who use illegal drugs experience routine surveillance, including in healthcare and harm reduction settings. The MySafe Project - a safer supply pilot project that dispenses prescription opioids via a biometric vending machine - exists in the Canadian province of British Columbia. The machine scans a participant's palmprint and has a built-in camera that records every machine interaction. The aim of this paper is to understand participants' experiences of surveillance, privacy, and personal security when accessing this novel program. An integrative case study and grounded theory methodology was employed. Qualitative one-to-one interviews were conducted with 46 MySafe participants across three different program sites in Vancouver. We used a team-based approach to code interview transcripts and utilized directed and conventional content analyses for deductive and inductive analyses. While participants described negative experiences of surveillance in other public and harm reduction settings, they did not have concerns regarding cameras, collection of personal information, tracking, nor staff issues associated with MySafe. Similarly, while some participants had privacy concerns in other settings, very few privacy and confidentiality concerns were expressed regarding accessing the machine in front of others. Lastly, while some participants reported being targeted by others when accessing the machines, most participants described how cameras, staff, and machine locations helped ensure a sense of safety. Despite negative experiences of surveillance and privacy issues elsewhere, participants largely lacked concern regarding the MySafe program and machines. The machine-human interaction was characterized as different than some human-human interactions as the machine is completing tasks in a manner that is acceptable and comfortable to participants, leading to a social preference toward the machines in comparison to other surveilled means of accessing medications. These findings provide an opportunity to rethink how we conceptualize surveillance, medication access, and harm reduction programs targeting people who use drugs.

Perceptions of prospective pharmaceutical stimulant substitution treatments among people who use illicit stimulants in Vancouver, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Stimulant-involved overdose deaths are increasing, driven by polysubstance use and adulteration of the illicit drug supply. While emerging evidence for prescription stimulant substitution is promising, there are no approved treatment options for stimulant use disorder that address the realities of an unpredictable drug supply. This study explores treatment experiences of people who use illicit stimulants (PWUS) to identify gaps and perceptions of prospective pharmaceutical stimulant substitution treatments (SST). METHODS: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 86 PWUS in Vancouver, Canada. Thematic analysis focused on experiences of available treatment options for stimulant use and perceptions of prospective SST. RESULTS: Participants identified how primarily behavioral treatment approaches do not meet the unique needs of PWUS, in contrast with the range of medical treatments available for opioid use disorder. Participants anticipated health and social benefits if they were able to access SST, including avoiding the toxic illicit stimulant supply, reduced engagement in criminalized activities, and greater economic security. Perceptions of prospective SST were informed by knowledge of existing opioid treatments. This led some participants to be unsupportive of SST, citing concerns around agency and highly regulated operational contexts that do not align with the lived realities of stimulant use. CONCLUSION: Findings demonstrate the need for SST pilot programs in real-world settings and underscore the health and social advantages SST may offer; although drawing on existing opioid treatment models to implement SST pilots may limit success. Thus, any novel treatments for stimulant use must centre the lived realities of PWUS.

Challenges of implementing safer supply programs in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Canada is experiencing an unprecedented drug toxicity crisis driven by a highly toxic unregulated drug supply contaminated with fentanyl, benzodiazepine, and other drugs. Safer supply pilot programs provide prescribed doses of pharmaceutical alternatives to individuals accessing the unregulated drug supply and have been implemented to prevent overdose and reduce related harms. Given the recent emergence of these pilot programs and the paucity of data on implementation challenges, we sought to document challenges in their initial implementation phase. METHODS: We obtained organizational progress reports from Health Canada, submitted between 2020 and 2022 by 11 pilot programs located in British Columbia, Ontario, and New Brunswick. We analyzed the data using deductive and inductive approaches via thematic analysis. Analyses were informed by the consolidated framework for implementation research. RESULTS: We obtained 45 progress reports from 11 pilot programs. Six centres were based in British Columbia, four in Ontario, and one in New Brunswick. Four overarching themes were identified regarding the challenges faced during the establishment and implementation of pilot programs: i) Organizational features (e.g., physical space constraints, staff shortages); ii) Outer contexts (e.g., limited operational funds and resources, structural inequities to access, public perceptions); iii) Intervention characteristics (e.g., clients' unmet medication needs); and iv) Implementation process (e.g., pandemic-related challenges, overly medicalized and high-barrier safer supply models). CONCLUSIONS: Safer supply pilot programs in Canada face multiple inner and outer implementation challenges. Given the potential role of safer supply programs in addressing the drug toxicity crisis in Canada and the possibility of future scale-up, services should be well-supported during their implementation phases. Refining service provision within safer supply programs based on the feedback and experiences of clients and program administrators is warranted, along with efforts to ensure that appropriate medications are available to meet the clients' needs.

Safer opioid supply via a biometric dispensing machine: a qualitative study of barriers, facilitators and associated outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The MySafe program provides pharmaceutical-grade opioids to participants with opioid use disorder via a biometric dispensing machine. The objectives of this study were to examine facilitators and barriers to safer supply via the MySafe program and the associated outcomes. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with participants who had been enrolled in the MySafe program for at least a month at 1 of 3 sites in Vancouver. We developed the interview guide in consultation with a community advisory board. Interviews focused on context of substance use and overdose risk, enrolment motivations, program access and functionality, and outcomes. We integrated case study and grounded theory methodologies, and used both conventional and directed content analyses to guide inductive and deductive coding processes. RESULTS: We interviewed 46 participants. Characteristics that facilitated use of the program included accessibility and choice, a lack of consequences for missing doses, nonwitnessed dosing, judgment-free services and an ability to accumulate doses. Barriers included technological issues with the dispensing machine, dosing challenges and prescriptions being tied to individual machines. Participant-reported outcomes included reduced use of illicit drugs, decreased overdose risk, positive financial impacts and improvements in health and well-being. INTERPRETATION: Participants perceived that the MySafe program reduced drug-related harms and promoted positive outcomes. This service delivery model may be able to circumvent barriers that exist at other safer opioid supply programs and may enable access to safer supply in settings where programs may otherwise be limited.

Community partner perspectives on the implementation of a novel safer supply program in Canada: a qualitative study of the MySafe Project.

BACKGROUND: The adulteration of the illicit drug supply with fentanyl and its analogues is driving the ongoing overdose crisis in North America. While various harm reduction interventions address overdose-related risks, there is growing interest in safer supply programs, including the MySafe Project which utilizes a biometric dispensing machine that provides pharmaceutical opioid alternatives to the toxic drug supply. However, the experiences and perspectives of professional community partners on program implementation remain unexplored. This study aims to examine professional community partner perspectives on the feasibility, as well as barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the MySafe program. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 17 professional community partners involved in program implementation across four pilot locations in Canada. Thematic analysis of interviews focused on perspectives on safer supply, barriers and facilitators faced during program implementation, and recommendations to inform future scale-up of low-barrier safer supply models across Canada. RESULTS: Participants identified a variety of barriers, including the dependence on clinician buy-in, coupled with regulatory and logistical constraints. In addition, some participants perceived hydromorphone to be an inadequate substitute to the increasingly toxic street opioid supply. Lastly, technical difficulties were described as barriers to service uptake and delivery. Conversely, having political and community buy-in, availability of wrap-around services, and collaborative communication from the MySafe team served as facilitators to program implementation. Though community partners preferred establishing MySafe machines into existing community organizations, they also discussed benefits of housing-based MySafe programs. The potential role of this program in mid-sized to rural cities was also emphasized. CONCLUSIONS: To address the overdose crisis, there is an urgent need to implement and evaluate novel solutions that address supply drivers of crisis. Community partner-informed research plays an integral role in ensuring program acceptability and proper implementation. Our findings identify current gaps and facilitators underlying the efficacy of one such model, together with future directions for improvement. Participant recommendations included a diversification of medications offered and types of locations for MySafe programs, a streamlined national approach to prescribing guidelines coupled with more robust training for healthcare professionals, and an emphasis on service delivery within an integrated services model. Our findings underscore a potential gap between the goals of healthcare providers in ensuring comprehensive care and the necessity for low-barrier models such as MySafe that can function both within and outside of integrated service models.

A scoping review of qualitative research on barriers and facilitators to the use of supervised consumption services.

A substantial body of evidence demonstrates that supervised consumption services (SCS) mitigate a variety of drug-related harms, including decreasing overdose deaths, infectious disease transmission, and connecting people who use drugs (PWUD) to various health and social services. Research on SCS has predominantly been quantitative, though qualitative research on these services has increased substantially over the last decade. Qualitative methods provide a framework for developing a richer and more nuanced understanding of meanings and contexts associated with drug use, health service implementation, and experience. We present findings from a scoping review of qualitative studies on experiences of PWUD with SCS published between 1997 and 2022. In total, forty-two papers were included in this analysis. Four primary themes emerged from our analysis: 1) Influence of SCS on health and wellbeing among PWUD, 2) the physical environment of SCS can be both a facilitator and barrier to use, 3) social resources can shape and reshape the context within which PWUD benefit from SCS, and 4) various intersecting forces at play both support and harm PWUD in relation to their experiences with SCS. We discuss the primary facilitators and barriers of SCS use and conclude with suggestions to inform future qualitative research, SCS implementation, and PWUD-centered approaches to drug policy.

Moving towards a continuum of safer supply options for people who use drugs: A qualitative study exploring national perspectives on safer supply among professional stakeholders in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Novel public health interventions are needed to address the toxic drug supply and meet the needs of people who use drugs amidst the overdose crisis. Safer supply - low-barrier distribution of pharmaceutical grade substances - has been implemented in some jurisdictions to provide safer alternatives to the unregulated drug supply, yet no studies to date have explored professional stakeholder perspectives on this approach. METHODS: We used purposive sampling to recruit professional stakeholders (n = 17) from four locations in British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scotia, including program managers, executive directors, political and health authority representatives, and healthcare providers involved in the design, implementation, and/or operation of safer supply programs in their communities. Semi-structured, one-to-one interviews were conducted, and interview data were coded and analyzed using thematic analyses. RESULTS: Participants defined safer supply as low-barrier access to substances of known quality and quantity, offered on a continuum from prescribed to a legal, regulated supply, and focused on upholding autonomy and liberation of people who use drugs. Stakeholders expressed support for safer supply but explained that current iterations do not meet the needs of all people who use drugs and that implementation is limited by a lack of willing prescribers, stigma towards people who use drugs, and precarity of harm reduction programs to political ideology. Stakeholders expressed strong support for wider-reaching approaches such as decriminalization, legalization, and regulation of substances as a way to fully realize a continuum of safer supply, directly address the overdose crisis and toxic drug supply, and ensure equity of access nationally. CONCLUSION: The results of this study highlight the need for innovative strategies to address the overdose crisis and that safer supply has the potential to benefit certain people who use drugs. A one-size-fits-all approach is not sufficient and the perspectives of professional stakeholders should be considered alongside those of people who use drugs when designing and implementing future safer supply.

Overdose Prevention and Housing: a Qualitative Study Examining Drug Use, Overdose Risk, and Access to Safer Supply in Permanent Supportive Housing in Vancouver, Canada.

The majority of overdose deaths in British Columbia (BC) occur among people using illicit substances alone in private residences. Some supportive housing in BC includes on-site access to a variety of health and substance use-related services. More recently, a number of supportive housing locations have started offering prescribed safer supply medications to people at high overdose risk, though these remain limited and under-evaluated. In this study, we describe the drug use practices - including access to and use of on-site supervised consumption, OAT, and prescribed safer supply medications - of study participants living in permanent supportive housing with integrated primary care, substance use treatment services, and supervised consumption spaces. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 30 residents of a permanent supportive housing site in Vancouver, Canada. Data were analyzed using a sequential process to identify both a priori (e.g., low-barrier substance use treatment, pandemic effects on service access) and emerging themes (e.g., using alone). Most (N = 27) study participants reported using alone in their rooms, despite having access to an on-site supervised consumption area. Reasons for using alone include the following: preference for being alone, discretion/stigma, and restrictive housing policies. Less than half (N = 12) of the study participants accessed on-site prescribed safer supply medications. Participants receiving on-site prescribed safer supply described positive benefits including reduced use of illicit opioids, and less reliance on illicit income generation activities. On-site prescribed safer supply programs within supportive housing environments are an important tool in addressing overdose risk.

The practice and embodiment of "goofballs": A qualitative study exploring the co-injection of methamphetamines and opioids.

BACKGROUND: Polysubstance use is common among people who use drugs, including the co-use of stimulants and opioids. Research suggests the practice of simultaneous co-injection of methamphetamines and opioids, often referred to as "goofballs", is increasing. As a relatively unique drug use practice, little qualitative research currently exists on goofball injecting. This study explores the practice and embodied experiences of goofball injecting. METHODS: This article draws on in-depth interviews conducted across two qualitative studies undertaken in Vancouver, Canada's Downtown Eastside neighbourhood examining changing dynamics in relation to stimulant use and experiences with an overdose prevention site-based safer supply intervention, respectively. Interviews containing discussions of goofball use (n=29) were extracted from each study and merged into a single qualitative dataset. Data were analysed thematically and focused on the practices and embodied experiences of goofball injection. RESULTS: Our analysis uncovered how goofball injection represented a complex drug use practice driven by the desire to achieve particular embodied experiences not attainable by using either drug individually. We identified three distinct practices of goofball use: 1) to alter or enhance the effects of opioids; 2) to alter or enhance the effects of methamphetamines; and 3) to balance out the effects of both drugs. CONCLUSION: Our study fills an important gap in the polysubstance use literature specifically exploring the co-injection of methamphetamines and opioids. Our findings highlight the need to implement and expand interventions and services attentive to polysubstance use and the role of pleasure in drug taking practices, including expanding non-medicalized opioid and stimulant safer supply initiatives across North America.

Implementation of Safe Supply Alternatives During Intersecting COVID-19 and Overdose Health Emergencies in British Columbia, Canada, 2021.

Objectives. To explore the implementation and effectiveness of the British Columbia, Canada, risk mitigation guidelines among people who use drugs, focusing on how experiences with the illicit drug supply shaped motivations to seek prescription alternatives and the subsequent impacts on overdose vulnerability. Methods. From February to July 2021, we conducted qualitative interviews with 40 people who use drugs in British Columbia, Canada, and who accessed prescription opioids or stimulants under the risk mitigation guidelines. Results. COVID-19 disrupted British Columbia's illicit drug market. Concerns about overdose because of drug supply changes, and deepening socioeconomic marginalization, motivated participants to access no-cost prescription alternatives. Reliable access to prescription alternatives addressed overdose vulnerability by reducing engagement with the illicit drug market while allowing greater agency over drug use. Because prescriptions were primarily intended to manage withdrawal, participants supplemented with illicit drugs to experience enjoyment and manage pain. Conclusions. Providing prescription alternatives to illicit drugs is a critical harm reduction approach that reduces exposure to an increasingly toxic drug supply, yet further optimizations are needed. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S2):S151-S158. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306692).

Characterizing stimulant overdose: A qualitative study on perceptions and experiences of "overamping".

BACKGROUND: The dominant focus of North America's current overdose crisis has been opioids, resulting in considerable research and harm reduction efforts to address opioid-related overdose risks. Less attention has been paid to people who use stimulants (PWUS) despite recent increases in stimulant use and stimulant-involved overdoses (i.e., "overamping"). Stimulant users' definitions, risk factors and experiences of, and responses to, overamping are poorly understood, thereby putting PWUS at heightened risk of adverse health outcomes. This study explores how PWUS understand, experience, and respond to overamping. METHODS: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 61 PWUS in Vancouver, Canada's Downtown Eastside neighbourhood. Thematic analysis of interviews focused on contextualizing stimulant overdoses, including how PWUS understand, define, experience, and respond to overamping. RESULTS: Participants associated overamping experiences with commonly identified signs and symptoms, such as rapid onset, elevated heart rate, incontinence, and audiovisua hallucinations, but also reported more serious indicators of overamping, such as unconsciousness, cardiac arrests and seizures. Our findings demonstrate that, among PWUS, there was no unified understanding of overamping such as with opioid overdose and individual experiences had substantial variation in severity and presentation. This impacted the ability to adequately respond to stimulant overdoses, which were primarily self-managed through methods including stabilizing breathing, polysubstance use, and cold showers. CONCLUSION: Given the growing role of stimulants in North America's overdose crisis, there is an urgent need to improve the identification of stimulant overdoses in real world settings. Our findings identify a gap in current understandings of stimulant overdose, and demonstrate the need for public health and harm reduction interventions to better address overamp risk among PWUS, including harm reduction campaigns to disseminate information regarding identifying signs of, and proper responses to, overamping.

"It's a burden, it's a nuisance. I wish I didn't have these other ailments": a qualitative exploration of comorbidities management among older people living with HIV who use drugs in Vancouver, British Columbia.

INTRODUCTION: People living with HIV (PLHIV) who use illicit drugs (other than or in addition to cannabis) are living longer due to antiretroviral therapy (ART). Older PLHIV who use drugs have an increased risk for comorbidities, and managing multiple health conditions is a growing concern among this population. However, in-depth understandings of the lived realities and complexities of living with HIV alongside comorbidities among older PLHIV who use drugs remain limited. We sought to explore how older PLHIV who use drugs manage their comorbid conditions in a setting with universal ART access. METHODS: Between January 2019 and March 2020, semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted in Vancouver, Canada with 42 older PLHIV who use drugs and were living with at least one comorbidity. All participants were currently on ART, and had initiated treatment at least 2 years prior to the interviews. Data were analysed using inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: Several themes were identified through this analysis. First, comorbidities were perceived as more urgent health concerns and prioritized over HIV. Second, stigma and discrimination hindered access to care for comorbidities. Third, the concurrent management of HIV and comorbidities was often challenging due to unmanaged or poorly managed comorbidities. Fourth, the potential impact of ART on the development of comorbidities was a source of concern and frustration. Finally, integrated treatment approaches facilitated engagement with HIV and comorbidities care. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the need for HIV care to shift from a primary focus on managing HIV to an integrated, patient-centred approach that addresses both HIV and non-HIV-related health needs, as well as an equitable and non-judgemental delivery of such care for an ageing population of PLHIV who use drugs.

Examining factors that shape use and access to diverted prescription opioids during an overdose crisis: A qualitative study in Vancouver, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Prescription opioid (PO) diversion is widely regarded as a driver of overdose mortality. However, less is known about the rationale for using diverted POs during an overdose epidemic and how contextual factors (e.g., poverty, drug policies) may affect this practice. Therefore, we sought to examine this phenomenon. METHOD: We conducted qualitative interviews with 24 participants who accessed diverted POs in Vancouver, Canada. Participants were recruited from ongoing cohort studies of people who use drugs (PWUD). RESULTS: Participants preferred a variety of POs due to their known contents and lower overdose risk compared to street drugs and used them for pain relief and pleasure. Participants reported barriers in accessing POs from physicians, with some being cut off or having insufficient prescriptions. Prices for diverted POs varied and affected access among impoverished participants. These access challenges led some to acquire fentanyl. Some participants reported concerns over the contents of counterfeit pills, while others relied on trusted sources or using visual cues to identify legitimate pills. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that diverted POs are being used by PWUD with the goal of reducing opioid-related harms, although PO use comes with challenges associated with limited accessibility and risks posed by counterfeit pills. Poverty also limited PO accessibility, leading some to purchase more toxic, yet affordable, street drugs. Given the risks and barriers affecting people seeking to use diverted POs, our findings emphasize the need for the continued implementation and evaluation of safer drug supply initiatives, including those providing access to various drug types.

"It's Helped Me a Lot, Just Like to Stay Alive": a Qualitative Analysis of Outcomes of a Novel Hydromorphone Tablet Distribution Program in Vancouver, Canada.

North America is experiencing an overdose crisis driven by fentanyl, related analogues, and fentanyl-adulterated drugs. In response, there have been increased calls for "safe supply" interventions based on the premise that providing a safer alternative (i.e., pharmaceutical drugs of known quality/quantity, non-adulterated, with user agency in consumption methods) to the street drug supply will limit people's use of fentanyl-adulterated drugs and reduce overdose events. This study examined outcomes of a hydromorphone tablet distribution program intended to prevent overdose events among people who use drugs (PWUD) at high risk of fatal overdose. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 42 people enrolled in the hydromorphone distribution program. Additionally, over 100 h of ethnographic observation were undertaken in and around the study site. Transcripts were coded using NVivo and based on categories extracted from the interview guides and those identified during initial interviews and ethnographic fieldwork. Analysis focused on narratives around experiences with the program, focusing on program-related outcomes. Our analysis identified the following positive outcomes of being enrolled in the hydromorphone tablet distribution program: (1) reduced street drug use and overdose risk, (2) improvements to health and well-being, (3) improvements in co-management of pain, and (4) economic improvements. Our findings indicate that the hydromorphone distribution program not only is effective in responding to the current overdose crisis by reducing people's use of illicit drugs but also addresses inequities stemming from the intersection of drug use and social inequality. Safe supply programs should be further implemented and evaluated in both urban and rural setting across North America as a strategy to reduce exposure to the toxic drug supply and fatal overdose.

Barriers and facilitators to a novel low-barrier hydromorphone distribution program in Vancouver, Canada: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: North America is experiencing an overdose crisis driven by illicitly-manufactured fentanyl, related analogues, and fentanyl-adulterated drugs. The concept of 'safe supply' has been suggested as a potential measure to address the overdose crisis by providing a regulated alternative to illicit opioids to people at high risk of fatal overdose. In January 2019, a novel hydromorphone tablet distribution program was implemented within an overdose prevention site in Vancouver, Canada's Downtown Eastside neighbourhood. This study explored barriers and facilitators to engagement with this program. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with 42 participants enrolled in the hydromorphone tablet distribution program, and over 100 h of ethnographic observation were conducted in and around the study site. Thematic analysis of the interviews and ethnographic observation focused on program operation, including barriers and facilitators to program uptake, access, and engagement. RESULTS: Barriers to program engagement identified include: limited operating hours and dose schedule, co-location within the overdose prevention site (e.g., wait times), and receiving the generic formulation of hydromorphone. Facilitators identified include: having access to a reliable source of opioids, co-location within the overdose prevention site (e.g., low-barrier design), experiences of agency, and program flexibility. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate key implementation and operational considerations of safe supply programs. In particular, lower-barrier design and operational features should be considered to improve uptake and engagement. Safe opioid supply programs are a promising intervention to address North America's ongoing overdose crisis by providing people at high risk of fatal overdose an alternative to the toxic drug supply.

Tackling the overdose crisis: The role of safe supply.

North America is experiencing an unprecedented overdose crisis driven by the proliferation of fentanyl and its analogues in the illicit drug supply. In 2018 there were 67,367 drug overdose deaths in the United States, and since 2016, there have been more than 14,700 overdose deaths in Canada, with most related to fentanyl. Despite concerted efforts and some positive progress, current public health, substance use treatment, and harm reduction interventions (such as widespread naloxone distribution and implementation of supervised consumption sites) have not been able to rapidly decrease overdose fatalities. In view of the persistent gaps in services and the limitations of available options, immediate scale-up of low-barrier opioid distribution programs are urgently needed. This includes "off-label" prescription of pharmaceutical grade opioids (e.g., hydromorphone) to disrupt the toxic drug supply and make safer opioids widely available to people at high risk of fatal overdose.

A Low-Barrier and Comprehensive Community-Based Harm-Reduction Site in Vancouver, Canada.

"The Molson" is a low-barrier, peer-staffed, supervised consumption site located in Vancouver, Canada. In addition to overdose response, this site offers drug checking and a colocated injectable hydromorphone treatment program, and it distributes tablet and liquid hydromorphone to service users at high risk of overdose. Our evaluation suggests benefits of this program in creating service continuums and preventing overdose deaths. From September 2017 to August 2019, the site had 128 944 visits, reversed 770 overdoses, and had no overdose deaths.

Problematizing the DSM-5 criteria for opioid use disorder: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: This paper includes the voices of people who are members of a peer-led drug user group (SNAP) in Canada who are receiving heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) outside of a clinical trial. Drawing from critical drug studies, we problematize the criteria for severe opioid use disorder (OUD) from the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, by exploring SNAP members' experiences in relation to heroin-assisted treatment, and examining how SNAP participants' narratives challenge conventional notions of what constitutes severe opioid use disorder. METHOD: Drawing on critical analysis and research guidelines developed by drug user unions and organizations, and critical methodological frameworks on ethical community-based-and-responsive research for social justice, in this paper we focus on semi-structured interviews conducted with 36 SNAP members at the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users site in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, Canada. We included opened ended questions about experiences prior to receiving HAT, experiences while receiving HAT, experiences of drug use and cessation, and future hopes. RESULTS: Although SNAP participants were diagnosed as suffering from OUD, the DSM-5 criteria for OUD fails to encompass their diverse experiences of opioid use. Nor does the DSM diagnosis capture the complexities of their lived experience. The DSM OUD constructs an idea of addiction and the addicted person based on a list of symptoms thought to be associated with extended use of opioids. The problem with this is that many of these "symptoms" of drug use are, in the case of SNAP participants, tied to contextual issues of living in the DTES, experiencing structural vulnerability, and being the target of punitive drug policies and laws. CONCLUSION: To label someone as having a severe disorder shifts the focus from political and social issues, including the lived experiences of people who use heroin. The DSM-5 de-contextualizes drug use. How addiction and heroin are constituted has political implications that will determine what types of services and programs will be set up. Treating a disorder, or a person with a disorder, requires a much different approach than understanding heroin use as a habit. SNAP, and their allies, are rupturing conventional ideas about heroin and taken for granted assumptions about people who use heroin.

Stimulant safe supply: a potential opportunity to respond to the overdose epidemic.

BACKGROUND: Occurring against the backdrop of an overdose crisis, stimulant use and stimulant-involved deaths in North America are increasing at an alarming rate. Many of these deaths are being attributed to fentanyl and related analogs, which have been increasingly found within street-level stimulant supplies. Within this, people experiencing socio-economic marginalization are at the greatest risk of overdose and other harms from adulterated stimulants. Current treatments for stimulant use disorder have limited effectiveness, and even less applicability to the lived realities of marginalized stimulant users. Emerging technologies, such as drug checking, are being implemented to support safer stimulant use, but the accessibility and utility of these technologies to stimulant users are framed by experiences of vulnerability that render them largely ineffective. STIMULANT SAFE SUPPLY: Solutions that provide a legal and safe supply of non-adulterated stimulants of known quality, and within a health care framework, are needed to directly address the risk of an increasingly adulterated stimulant supply. Similar innovative opioid-focused interventions are being piloted with medications that have a similar pharmacological effect as their illicit counterparts. While there are currently no approved pharmacotherapies for stimulant use, research has demonstrated a number of stimulant medications that are promising substitutes for cocaine and methamphetamine use. Much like with opioid-focused pharmacotherapies, having a consistent and safe supply of stimulants can lead to improved health outcomes and will drastically reduce overdose risk. However, for a stimulant safe supply intervention to be a success, it must provide the high and performance-enhancing effects that people seek from the illicit market, which requires doses and user agency that trials to date have not provided. CONCLUSION: Efforts are needed to investigate the feasibility of pharmacological stimulant-based interventions that address safe supply needs. The promise of similar opioid-focused approaches in addressing both overdose-related risks and experiences related to vulnerability underscores the need to advance safe supply approaches targeted towards people who use stimulants. Given the current overdose crisis and rising stimulant use across North America, the implementation and evaluation of such novel stimulant-focused interventions should be a public health priority.