Motivators of and barriers to drug checking engagement in British Columbia, Canada: Findings from a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Responding to increasing rates of illicit drug toxicity mortality in British Columbia, regional health authorities introduced various types and models of drug checking services starting in 2016. Uptake has been gradual yet consistent, but motivators and barriers of service use have not been well-described. METHODS: The British Columbia Harm Reduction Client Survey is a cross-sectional survey conducted at harm reduction sites across British Columbia. Data for the present findings were collected between March 2021 and January 2022. Participants (n = 537) were asked about their use of drug checking services and what prevented them from using available services. Responses were analyzed with descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of all participants, 519 (96.6 %) answered the survey question on drug checking with 144 (27.7 %) reporting having used services within six months. Participants highlighted barriers such as not knowing where to access services (21.0 %), or not having services in their area (10.0 %). Among people who did not report recent use of fentanyl, 49.6 % stated they would not use their drugs if they tested positive for fentanyl. Other harm reduction behaviors were positively associated with drug checking, such as use of overdose prevention sites (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 2.75, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.65, 4.59) and having a naloxone kit (AOR: 2.67, 95 %CI: 1.14, 6.28). Receipt of opioid agonist therapy in the previous six months was also positively associated with drug checking (AOR: 1.72, 95 %CI: 1.05, 2.83). DISCUSSION: Drug checking uptake remains low in British Columbia, however this study identified desire for services among participants, suggesting a need for expanded drug checking services. Behavioral change was reported among a high proportion of people who said they would not use their drugs if they tested positive for fentanyl, meaning that immunoassay strips alone have utility in the context of a pervasive fentanyl supply.

Associations with experience of non-fatal opioid overdose in British Columbia, Canada: a repeated cross sectional survey study.

INTRODUCTION: Lives lost in North America due to the unregulated drug poisoning emergency are preventable and those who survive an opioid overdose may suffer long-term disability. Rates of opioid overdose more than doubled following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in British Columbia, Canada. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our analytical sample was comprised of 1447 participants from the 2018, 2019, and 2021 Harm Reduction Client Survey who responded yes or no to having experienced an opioid overdose in the past 6 months. Participants were recruited from harm reduction sites from across British Columbia. We used logistic regression to explore associations of experiencing an opioid overdose. RESULTS: Overall, 21.8% of participants reported experiencing an opioid overdose in the last six months (18.2% in 2019 and 26.6% in 2021). The following factors were positively associated with increased adjusted odds of experiencing a non-fatal opioid overdose: cis men relative to cis women (AOR 1.49, 95% CI 1.10-2.02), unstably housed compared to people with stable housing (AOR 1.87, 95% CI 1.40-2.50), and participants from 2021 compared to those from 2019 (AOR 3.06, 95% CI 1.57-5.97). The effects of both previous experience of a stimulant overdose and having witnessed an opioid overdose depended on the year of study, with both effects decreasing over subsequent years. CONCLUSIONS: Overdoses have increased over time; in 2021 more than one in four participants experienced an overdose. There is an urgent need for policy and program development to meaningfully address the unregulated drug poisoning emergency through acceptable life-saving interventions and services to prevent overdoses and support overdose survivors.

Document d'orientation sur la distribution et l'utilisation de trousses de naloxone à emporter par les intervenants et intervenantes communautaires en cas de surdose au Canada.

CONTEXTE: La toxicité croissante des opioïdes dans le marché illicite des drogues a fait exploser le nombre de surdoses au Canada et ailleurs dans le monde; le programme de naloxone à emporter (NàE) est une intervention fondée sur des données probantes qui consiste à distribuer des trousses contenant de la naloxone aux membres de la communauté susceptibles d'être témoins d'une surdose. L'objectif du présent document d'orientation est de formuler des recommandations stratégiques à l'intention des programmes fédéraux, provinciaux et territoriaux de NàE, en s'appuyant sur des données probantes issues de la documentation scientifique, de la littérature grise et des communautés, à la lumière de 11 années de distribution de NàE au Canada. MÉTHODES : Le groupe d'élaboration des documents d'orientation sur la naloxone, une équipe multidisciplinaire composée de personnes ayant une expertise et une expérience vécue en matière de toxicomanie, a appliqué l'outil AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation) afin d'éclairer l'élaboration du présent document d'orientation. En vue de l'élaboration de nos recommandations, nous avons procédé entre décembre 2021 et septembre 2022 à une revue systématique de tous les types d'ouvrages dans le but de recueillir les données probantes publiées, ainsi que les données probantes et l'expertise issues de la communauté. Nous avons sollicité des commentaires sur nos recommandations préliminaires par le biais d'un comité de révision externe et d'un processus de participation du public. Le projet a été financé par les Instituts de recherche en santé du Canada dans le cadre de l'Initiative canadienne de recherche sur l'abus de substances (ICRAS). Nous avons appliqué les principes du Réseau international en matière de lignes directrices (Guidelines International Network) pour gérer les intérêts concurrents. RECOMMANDATIONS: Les données probantes existantes issues de la documentation sur la NàE étaient de faible qualité. Pour élaborer nos recommandations, nous avons incorporé des données probantes tirées de la documentation scientifique et de la littérature grise, ainsi que l'expertise de la communauté. Nos recommandations portent sur 3 volets : les voies d'administration de la naloxone, le contenu des trousses de NàE et les interventions en cas de situations de surdose. Les trousses distribuées par les programmes de naloxone à emporter doivent offrir le choix entre les préparations intramusculaire et intranasale. Le contenu recommandé de la trousse comprend la naloxone, un dispositif d'administration de la naloxone, un équipement de protection individuelle, des instructions et un étui de transport. Les intervenants et intervenantes communautaires formés à la réponse aux surdoses doivent prioriser la respiration artificielle en cas de dépression respiratoire, et la réanimation cardiorespiratoire (RCR) conventionnelle en cas d'arrêt cardiaque, entre autres interventions. INTERPRÉTATION : Ce projet d'élaboration d'un document d'orientation vise à guider les programmes de NàE au Canada dans un contexte où les données probantes publiées sont rares; les recommandations ont été élaborées en collaboration avec diverses parties prenantes.

Doing community-based research during dual public health emergencies (COVID and overdose).

Meaningful engagement and partnerships with people who use drugs are essential to conducting research that is relevant and impactful in supporting desired outcomes of drug consumption as well as reducing drug-related harms of overdose and COVID-19. Community-based participatory research is a key strategy for engaging communities in research that directly affects their lives. While there are growing descriptions of community-based participatory research with people who use drugs and identification of key principles for conducting research, there is a gap in relation to models and frameworks to guide research partnerships with people who use drugs. The purpose of this paper is to provide a framework for research partnerships between people who use drugs and academic researchers, collaboratively developed and implemented as part of an evaluation of a provincial prescribed safer supply initiative introduced during dual public health emergencies (overdose and COVID-19) in British Columbia, Canada. The framework shifts from having researchers choose among multiple models (advisory, partnership and employment) to incorporating multiple roles within an overall community-based participatory research approach. Advocacy by and for drug users was identified as a key role and reason for engaging in research. Overall, both academic researchers and Peer Research Associates benefited within this collaborative partnerships approach. Each offered their expertise, creating opportunities for omni-directional learning and enhancing the research. The shift from fixed models to flexible roles allows for a range of involvement that accommodates varying time, energy and resources. Facilitators of involvement include development of trust and partnering with networks of people who use drugs, equitable pay, a graduate-level research assistant dedicated to ongoing orientation and communication, technical supports as well as fluidity in roles and opportunities. Key challenges included working in geographically dispersed locations, maintaining contact and connection over the course of the project and ensuring ongoing sustainable but flexible employment.

Guidance on take-home naloxone distribution and use by community overdose responders in Canada.

BACKGROUND: The increasing toxicity of opioids in the unregulated drug market has led to escalating numbers of overdoses in Canada and worldwide; takehome naloxone (THN) is an evidence-based intervention that distributes kits containing naloxone to people in the community who may witness an overdose. The purpose of this guidance is to provide policy recommendations for territorial, provincial and federal THN programs, using evidence from scientific and grey literature and community evidence that reflects 11 years of THN distribution in Canada. METHODS: The Naloxone Guidance Development Group - a multidisciplinary team including people with lived and living experience and expertise of drug use - used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument to inform development of this guidance. We considered published evidence identified through systematic reviews of all literature types, along with community evidence and expertise, to generate recommendations between December 2021 and September 2022. We solicited feedback on preliminary recommendations through an External Review Committee and a public input process. The project was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research through the Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse. We used the Guideline International Network principles for managing competing interests. RECOMMENDATIONS: Existing evidence from the literature on THN was of low quality. We incorporated evidence from scientific and grey literature, and community expertise to develop our recommendations. These were in 3 areas: routes of naloxone administration, THN kit contents and overdose response. Take-home naloxone programs should offer the choice of both intramuscular and intranasal formulations of naloxone in THN kits. Recommended kit contents include naloxone, a naloxone delivery device, personal protective equipment, instructions and a carrying case. Trained community overdose responders should prioritize rescue breathing in the case of respiratory depression, and conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the case of cardiac arrest, among other interventions. INTERPRETATION: This guidance development project provides direction for THN programs in Canada in the context of limited published evidence, with recommendations developed in collaboration with diverse stakeholders.

An evaluation of the Compassion, Inclusion, and Engagement initiative: learning from PWLE and communities across British Columbia.

BACKGROUND: The Compassion, Inclusion and Engagement initiative (CIE) was a social contact intervention that operated in British Columbia between 2015 and 2021. The primary objective of CIE was to increase the participation of people with lived experience of substance use (PWLE) in the planning, design, implementation, and evaluation of harm reduction supports and services. CASE PRESENTATION: CIE used the developmental evaluation methodology outcome mapping to define and measure progress towards its goals. Developmental evaluation emphasizes learning in contrast to other forms of evaluation which are often more focused on determining the value or success of a project or programme based on predetermined criteria. Outcome mapping is a relational practice which acknowledges that change is achieved by an initiative's partners and the role of the initiative is to provide access to resources, ideas and opportunities that can facilitate and support change. CONCLUSIONS: Through the implementation and evaluation of CIE, it became clear that directly supporting PWLE facilitated more meaningful and lasting change than solely working to improve the health and social services that supported them. The impacts of the CIE initiative extend far beyond the outcomes of any of the dialogues it facilitated and are largely the result of an increase in social capital. CIE engagements created the opportunity for change by inviting people most affected by the toxic drug supply together with those committed to supporting them, but their ability to bring about systemic change was limited. Both PWLE and service providers noted the lack of support to attend CIE engagements, lack of support for actions that came from those engagements, and lack of PWLE inclusion in decision-making by health authorities as limiting factors for systemic change. The lack of response at a systemic level often resulted in PWLE carrying the burden of responding to toxic drug poisonings, often without resources, support, or compensation.

Guideline development in harm reduction: Considerations around the meaningful involvement of people who access services.

Background: Harm reduction seeks to minimizes the negative effects of drug use while respecting the rights of people with lived and living experience of substance use (PWLLE). Guideline standards ("guidelines for guidelines") provide direction on developing healthcare guidelines. To identify essential considerations for guideline development within harm reduction, we examined whether guideline standards are consistent with a harm reduction approach in their recommendations on involving people who access services. Methods: We searched the literature from 2011-2021 to identify guideline standards used in harm reduction and publications on involving PWLLE in developing harm reduction services. We used thematic analysis to compare their guidance on involving people who access services. Findings were validated with two organizations of PWLLE. Results: Six guideline standards and 18 publications met inclusion criteria. We identified three themes related to involving people who access services: Reasons for Involvement, Methods of Involvement, and Factors in Success. Subthemes varied across the literature. We identified five essential considerations for guideline development in harm reduction: establishing a shared understanding of reasons for involving PWLLE; respecting their expertise; partnering with PWLLE to ensure appropriate engagement; incorporating perspectives of populations disproportionately affected by substance use; and securing resources. Conclusion: Guideline standards and the harm reduction literature approach the involvement of people who access services from different perspectives. Thoughtful integration of the two paradigms can improve guidelines while empowering PWLLE. Our findings can support the development of high-quality guidelines that align with the fundamental principles of harm reduction in their involvement of PWLLE.

Evaluation of risk mitigation measures for people with substance use disorders to address the dual public health crises of COVID-19 and overdose in British Columbia: a mixed-method study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic was preceded by an ongoing overdose crisis and linked to escalating drug overdose deaths in British Columbia (BC). At the outset of these dual public health emergencies, the BC government announced interim Risk Mitigation Guidance (RMG) that permitted prescribing medication alternatives to substances, including opioids, alcohol, stimulants and benzodiazepines, an intervention sometimes referred to as 'safe supply'. This protocol outlines the approach for a study of the implementation of RMG and its impacts on COVID-19 infection, drug-related and systemic harms, continuity of care for people with substance use disorder (SUD), as well as their behavioural, psychosocial and well-being outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We conducted a parallel mixed-method study that involved both analysis of population-level administrative health data and primary data collection, including a 10-week longitudinal observational study (target n=200), a cross-sectional survey (target n=200) and qualitative interviews (target n=60). We implemented a participatory approach to this evaluation, partnering with people with lived or living expertise of drug use, and researchers and public health decision-makers across the province. Linked population-level administrative databases will analyse data from a cohort of BC residents with an indication of SUD between 1996 and 2020. We will execute high-dimensional propensity score matching and marginal structural modelling to construct a control group and to assess the impact of RMG dispensation receipt on a collaboratively determined set of primary and secondary outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study activities were developed to adhere to the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, recommended COVID-19 research practices, and guided by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's Calls to Action for public health, data governance and research ethics related to Indigenous people. Results will be disseminated incrementally, on an ongoing basis, through the consortium established for this study, then published in peer-reviewed journals.

Peer engagement barriers and enablers: insights from people who use drugs in British Columbia, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Globally, engaging people who have used drugs, or peers, in decision-making has been increasingly touted as a best practice approach to developing priorities, programs, and policies. Peer engagement ensures decisions are relevant, appropriate, and effective to the affected community. However, ensuring that inclusion is accessible and equitable for those involved remains a challenge. In this study, we examined the perspectives of people who use or have used illicit drugs (PWUD) on peer engagement in health and harm reduction settings across British Columbia (BC), Canada. METHODS: The Peer Engagement and Evaluation Project used a participatory approach to conducting 13 peer-facilitated focus groups (n = 83) across BC. Focus group data were coded and analyzed with five peer research assistants. Themes about the nature of peer engagement were generated. From this analysis, peer engagement barriers and enablers were identified. RESULTS: Barriers to peer engagement included individual, geographical, systemic, and social factors. Issues related to stigma, confidentiality, and mistrust were intensely discussed among participants. Being "outed" in one's community was a barrier to engagement, particularly in rural areas. Participants voiced that compensation, setting, and the right people help facilitate and motivate engagement. Peer networks are an essential ingredient to engagement by promoting support and advocacy. CONCLUSION: PWUD are important stakeholders in decisions that affect them. This cross-jurisdictional study investigated how PWUD have experienced engagement efforts in BC, identifying several factors that influence participation. Meaningful engagement can be facilitated by attention to communication, relationships, personal capacity, and compassion between peers and other professionals.

Participant, peer and PEEP: considerations and strategies for involving people who have used illicit substances as assistants and advisors in research.

BACKGROUND: The Peer Engagement and Evaluation Project (PEEP) aimed to engage, inspire, and learn from peer leaders who represented voices of people who use or have used illicit substances, through active membership on the 'Peeps' research team. Given the lack of critical reflection in the literature about the process of engaging people who have used illicit substances in participatory and community-based research processes, we provide a detailed description of how one project, PEEP, engaged peers in a province-wide research project. METHODS: By applying the Peer Engagement Process Evaluation Framework, we critically analyze the intentions, strategies employed, and outcomes of the process utilized in the PEEP project and discuss the implications for capacity building and empowerment among the peer researchers. This process included: the formation of the PEEP team; capacity building; peer-facilitated data collection; collaborative data analysis; and, strengths-based approach to outputs. RESULTS: Several lessons were learned from applying the Peer Engagement Process Evaluation Framework to the PEEP process. These lessons fall into themes of: recruiting and hiring; fair compensation; role and project expectations; communication; connection and collaboration; mentorship; and peer-facilitated research. CONCLUSION: This project offers a unique approach to engaging people who use illicit substances and demonstrates how participation is an important endeavor that improves the relevance, capacity, and quality of research. Lessons learned in this project can be applied to future community-based research with people who use illicit substances or other marginalized groups and/or participatory settings.

Pain as a risk factor for substance use: a qualitative study of people who use drugs in British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: People who use drugs have a significantly higher prevalence of chronic non-cancer pain compared to the general population, yet little is known about how various policy, economic, physical, and social environments may serve as risk or protective factors in the context of concurrent pain and substance use. Therefore, this study sought to explore perspectives, risks, and harms associated with pain among people who use drugs. METHODS: Thirteen focus group interviews were held across British Columbia, Canada, from July to September 2015. In total, 83 people who had lived experience with substance use participated in the study. Using an interpretive description approach, themes were conceptualized according to the Rhodes' Risk Environment and patient-centered care frameworks. RESULTS: Participants described how their experiences with inadequately managed pain in various policy, economic, physical, and social environments reinforced marginalization, such as restrictive policies, economic vulnerability, lack of access to socio-physical support systems, stigma from health professionals, and denial of pain medication leading to risky self-medication. Principles of patient-centered care were often not upheld, from a lack of recognition of patients as experts in understanding their unique pain needs and experiences, to an absence of shared power and decision-making, which often resulted in distrust of the patient-provider relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Various risk environments and non-patient-centered interactions may contribute to an array of health and social harms in the context of inadequately managed pain among people who use drugs.

Peer engagement in harm reduction strategies and services: a critical case study and evaluation framework from British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Engaging people with drug use experience, or 'peers,' in decision-making helps to ensure harm reduction services reflect current need. There is little published on the implementation, evaluation, and effectiveness of meaningful peer engagement. This paper aims to describe and evaluate peer engagement in British Columbia from 2010-2014. METHODS: A process evaluation framework specific to peer engagement was developed and used to assess progress made, lessons learned, and future opportunities under four domains: supportive environment, equitable participation, capacity building and empowerment, and improved programming and policy. The evaluation was conducted by reviewing primary and secondary qualitative data including focus groups, formal documents, and meeting minutes. RESULTS: Peer engagement was an iterative process that increased and improved over time as a consequence of reflexive learning. Practical ways to develop trust, redress power imbalances, and improve relationships were crosscutting themes. Lack of support, coordination, and building on existing capacity were factors that could undermine peer engagement. Peers involved across the province reviewed and provided feedback on these results. CONCLUSION: Recommendations from this evaluation can be applied to other peer engagement initiatives in decision-making settings to improve relationships between peers and professionals and to ensure programs and policies are relevant and equitable.