Building Capacity for Injectable Diacetylmorphine and Hydromorphone for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: Identifying Typical Doses.

Identifying typical doses of existing opioid use disorder medications, such as injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT), can support client and program needs, and potentially increase iOAT expansion. Longitudinal data from participants in a cohort study (n = 131), along with clinic dispensation records from August 2014 to April 2020, were used to examine physician prescribed as well as used doses of injectable diacetylmorphine and hydromorphone. Dosage groups, by medication and prescribed dose per session, were created for both hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine. A total of 534, 522 injections were registered during the study period among 129 participants. Mean received diacetylmorphine doses ranged from 106 to 989 mg per day, with most clients using 125-262 mg per session (mean 192.99 mg) and attending 2.40 sessions per day. Mean received hydromorphone doses ranged from 51.09 to 696.06 mg per day, with the majority using 88-154 mg per session (mean 121.32 mg; 2.43 sessions). Average daily doses remained stable overtime and, while mid-range doses were most typical, participants used the whole spectrum of allowable dose prescriptions. Evidence supporting typical doses of iOAT can be integrated into program planning to better allow providers and prescribers to anticipate program needs and engage in individualized care.

Shared decision-making and client-reported dose satisfaction in a longitudinal cohort receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT).

BACKGROUND: Across different types of oral Opioid Agonist Treatment for people with Opioid Use Disorder, receiving a dose that meets their needs is associated with better outcomes. Evidence also shows patients are more likely to receive an "adequate dose" when their prescribers are involving them in decision making. Neither of these findings have been studied in the context of injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment, which is the purpose of this study. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of an 18-month prospective longitudinal cohort study of 131 people receiving injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment. In the 18-month study, observations were collected every two months for one year, and then once more at 18 months. At 6 months, participants were asked whether their dose was satisfactory to them (outcome variable). Generalized Estimating Equations were used, to account for multiple observations from each participant. The final multivariate model was built using a stepwise approach. RESULTS: Five hundred forty-five participant-observations were included in the analysis. Participant-observations were grouped by "dose is satisfactory" and "wants higher dose". From unadjusted analyses, participants were less likely to report being satisfied with their dose if they: were Indigenous, had worse psychological or physical health problems, had ever attempted suicide, were younger when they first injected any drug, were a current smoker, felt troubled by drug problems, gave their medication a lower "drug liking" score, and felt that their doctor was not including them in decisions the way they wanted to be. In the final multivariate model, all previously significant associations except for "current smoker" and "troubled by drug problems" were no longer significant after the addition of the "drug liking" score. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment who are not satisfied with their dose are more likely to: be troubled by drug problems, be a current smoker, and report liking their medication less than dose-satisfied patients. Prescribers' practicing shared decision-making can help patients achieve dose-satisfaction and possibly alleviate troubles from drug problems. Additionally, receiving a satisfactory dose may be dependent on patients being able to access an opioid agonist medication (and formulation) that they like.

The impact of relaxing restrictions on take-home doses during the COVID-19 pandemic on program effectiveness and client experiences in opioid agonist treatment: a mixed methods systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led to an unprecedented relaxation of restrictions on take-home doses in opioid agonist treatment (OAT). We conducted a mixed methods systematic review to explore the impact of these changes on program effectiveness and client experiences in OAT. METHODS: The protocol for this review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022352310). From Aug.-Nov. 2022, we searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and the grey literature. We included studies reporting quantitative measures of retention in treatment, illicit substance use, overdose, client health, quality of life, or treatment satisfaction or using qualitative methods to examine client experiences with take-home doses during the pandemic. We critically appraised studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. We synthesized quantitative data using vote-counting by direction of effect and presented the results in harvest plots. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic synthesis. We used a convergent segregated approach to integrate quantitative and qualitative findings. RESULTS: Forty studies were included. Most were from North America (23/40) or the United Kingdom (9/40). The quantitative synthesis was limited by potential for confounding, but suggested an association between take-home doses and increased retention in treatment. There was no evidence of an association between take-home doses and illicit substance use or overdose. Qualitative findings indicated that take-home doses reduced clients' exposure to unregulated substances and stigma and minimized work/treatment conflicts. Though some clients reported challenges with managing their medication, the dominant narrative was one of appreciation, reduced anxiety, and a renewed sense of agency and identity. The integrated analysis suggested reduced treatment burden as an explanation for improved retention and revealed variation in individual relationships between take-home doses and illicit substance use. We identified a critical gap in quantitative measures of patient-important outcomes. CONCLUSION: The relaxation of restrictions on take-home doses was associated with improved client experience and retention in OAT. We found no evidence of an association with illicit substance use or overdose, despite the expansion of take-home doses to previously ineligible groups. Including patient-important outcome measures in policy, program development, and treatment planning is essential to ensuring that decisions around take-home doses accurately reflect their value to clients.

Fatigue presentation, severity, and related outcomes in a prospective cohort following post-COVID-19 hospitalization in British Columbia, Canada.

Introduction: Increasing evidence on long-term health outcomes following SARS CoV-2 infection shows post-viral symptoms can persist for months. These symptoms are often consistent with those of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis or Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS). The aim of the present study was to examine the prevalence and outcome predictors of post-viral fatigue and related symptoms 3- and 6-months following symptom onset. Methods: A prospective cohort of patients hospitalized with Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) (n = 88) were recruited from a Post-COVID-19 Respiratory Clinic (PCRC) in Vancouver, Canada to examine predictors of long-term fatigue and substantial fatigue. Multivariable mixed effects analyses examined the relationship between patient predictors, including pre-existing comorbidities, patient reported outcome measures, and fatigue and substantial fatigue at follow-up. Results: The number of patients experiencing fatigue or substantial fatigue at 3 months post-infection were 58 (67%) and 14 (16%) respectively. At 6 months these numbers declined to 47 (60%) patients experiencing fatigue and 6 (6%) experiencing substantial fatigue. Adjusted analysis, for sex, age, and time, revealed the number of pre-existing comorbidities to be associated with fatigue (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.09-4.49; 0.028) and substantial fatigue (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.06-2.95; 0.033) at 3 months follow-up. Except for shortness of breath, self-care, and follow-up time, all follow-up variables were found to be associated with fatigue and substantial fatigue at 3 months. Conclusion: Fatigue and substantial fatigue are common after COVID-19 infection but often diminish over time. A significant number of patients continue to exhibit long-term fatigue at 6 months follow-up. Further research is needed to clarify the causality of viral infections in the development and severity of fatigue as a symptom and in meeting post-viral fatigue syndrome or ME/CFS diagnostic criteria.

Changes in daily dose in open-label compared to double-blind: The role of clients' expectations in injectable opioid agonist treatment.

Introduction: Though double-blind studies have indicated that hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine produce similar effects when administered through injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) programs, participant preference may influence some aspects of medication dispensation such as dose. Methods:  This is a retrospective longitudinal analysis. Participants (n = 131) were previously enrolled in a double-blind clinical trial for iOAT who continued to receive treatment in an open-label follow up study. Data included medication dispensation records from 2012 to 2020. Using linear regression and paired t-tests, average daily dose totals of hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine were examined comparatively between double-blind and open-label periods. A subgroup analysis explored dose difference by preference using the proxy, blinding guess, a variable used to facilitate the measurement of treatment masking during the clinical trial by asking which medication the participant thought they received. Results: During the open-label period, participants prescribed diacetylmorphine received 49.5 mg less than during the double-blind period (95% CI -12.6,-86.4). Participants receiving hydromorphone did not see a significant dose decrease. Participants who guessed they received hydromorphone during the clinical trial, but learned they were on diacetylmorphine during the open-label period, saw a decrease in total daily dose of 78.3 mg less (95% CI -134.3,-22.4) during the open-label period. Conclusion: If client preference is considered in the treatment of chronic opioid use disorder, clients may be able to better moderate their dose to suit their individual needs. Together with their healthcare providers, clients can participate in their treatment trajectories collaboratively to optimize client outcomes and promote person-centered treatment options.

Low rate of reinfection among a cohort of people who use drugs successfully treated for hepatitis C virus infection in Vancouver, Canada.

INTRODUCTION: Concerns about reinfection may be limiting HCV treatment uptake among people who use drugs (PWUD), with rates of 17.1/100 person-years in some cohorts. The aim of this study was to evaluate reinfection following successful treatment for hepatitis C virus infection in a cohort of people who inject drugs in Vancouver, Canada. METHODS: We identified a cohort of HCV-infected PWUD treated at our centre. Following cure, patients were maintained in long-term follow-up in a multidisciplinary program to address their medical, psychological, social, and addiction-related needs. HCV RNA measurements were repeated every 6 months, and ongoing drug use was documented. The primary outcome of this analysis was the occurrence of reinfection. RESULTS: 243 recent PWUD (use within 6 months of treatment initiation) have achieved SVR and maintained in long-term follow-up. Ongoing drug use post-treatment was documented in 195 individuals. Key characteristics: mean age 53 years, 25% female, 78% treatment naïve, 17% cirrhotic. Reinfection occurred in 4 cases, all in patients with ongoing drug use. This incidence was 1.05/100 [95% 0.8-5.2] person years based on 379 person-years of follow-up in individuals currently using drugs. CONCLUSION: Approaches including long-term maintenance in multidisciplinary care may optimize long-term outcomes of HCV treatment in PWUD.