Barriers to, and Facilitators of, Checking Drugs for Adulterants in the Era of Fentanyl and Xylazine: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Overdose deaths continue to reach new records in New York City and nationwide, largely driven by adulterants such as fentanyl and xylazine in the illicit drug supply. Unknowingly consuming adulterated substances dramatically increases risks of overdose and other health problems, especially when individuals consume multiple adulterants and are exposed to a combination of drugs they did not intend to take. Although test strips and more sophisticated devices enable people to check drugs for adulterants including fentanyl and xylazine prior to consumption and are often available free of charge, many people who use drugs decline to use them. OBJECTIVE: We sought to better understand why people in the New York City area do or do not check drugs before use. We plan to use study findings to inform the development of technology-based interventions to encourage consistent drug checking. METHODS: In summer 2023, team members who have experience working with people who use drugs conducted 22 semistructured qualitative interviews with a convenience sample of people who reported illicit drug use within the past 90 days. An interview guide examined participants' knowledge of and experience with adulterants including fentanyl, xylazine, and benzodiazepines; using drug testing strips; and whether they had ever received harm reduction services. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for emerging themes. RESULTS: Most participants lacked knowledge of adulterants, and only a few reported regularly checking drugs. Reasons for not checking included lacking convenient access to test supplies, or a place to check samples out of the public's view, as well as time considerations. Some participants also reported a strong belief that they were not at risk from fentanyl, xylazine, or other adulterants because they exclusively used cocaine or crack, or that they were confident the people they bought drugs from would not sell them adulterated substances. Those who did report testing their drugs described positive interactions with harm reduction agency staff. CONCLUSIONS: New forms of outreach are needed not only to increase people's knowledge of adulterated substances and awareness of the increasing risks they pose but also to encourage people who use drugs to regularly check their substances prior to use. This includes new intervention messages that highlight the importance of drug checking in the context of a rapidly changing and volatile drug supply. This messaging can potentially help normalize drug checking as an easily enacted behavior that benefits public health. To increase effectiveness, messages can be developed with, and outreach can be conducted by, trusted community members including people who use drugs and, potentially, people who sell drugs. Pairing this messaging with access to no-cost drug-checking supplies and equipment may help address the ongoing spiral of increased overdose deaths nationwide.

Exploration of weekly variation in naloxone possession and carriage among people who use opioids in New York City before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone is critical for reversing opioid-related overdoses. However, there is a dearth of research examining how naloxone possession and carriage are impacted by time-varying individual and social determinants, and if this differed during the height of the COVID-related mitigation measures (e.g., shutdowns). METHODS: We utilized weekly ecological momentary assessments (EMA) to measure factors associated with naloxone possession and carriage among 40 people who use illicit opioids in New York City, for 24 months. Descriptive statistics were used to explore the frequency of weeks with consistent naloxone possession and carriage. Mixed effects binary and multivariable logistic regression was used to test for the impact of time-varying EMA- and baseline-level factors on each outcome. RESULTS: Approximately 70% of weekly EMAs were associated with consistent naloxone possession or carriage. In multivariable models, compared to during the height of the COVID-related shutdowns (March 12, 2020-May 19, 2021), the time before was associated with lower odds of consistent possession (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.05, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.01-0.15) and consistent carriage (OR = 0.06, CI = 0.01-0.25). Additionally, being female (OR = 11.15, CI = 2.85-43.42), being White versus being Black or Hispanic/Latinx (OR = 8.05, CI = 1.96-33.06), and lifetime overdose (OR = 1.96, CI = 1.16-19.80) were associated with higher odds of consistent possession. Recent opioid injection (OR = 3.66, CI = 1.34-9.94), being female (OR = 7.91, CI = 3.91-8.23), and being White (OR = 5.77, CI = 1.35-24.55) were associated with higher odds of consistent carriage. Not wanting to be perceived as a drug user was reported in nearly one third (29.0%; 190/656) of EMAs where inconsistent possession was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings paint a relatively positive picture of possession and carriage during COVID-related shutdowns, particularly among white and female participants, and highlight the importance of capturing time-varying factors to understand naloxone-related behavior. To curb growing disparities, outreach to equip Black and Hispanic/Latinx people with naloxone is needed as well as interventions to reduce stigma as a barrier to naloxone engagement.

Overdose Risk and Brain Injury (Traumatic Brain Injury/Acquired Brain Injury), A Commentary.

OBJECTIVE: This commentary seeks to evaluate existing knowledge about the relationship between brain injury (BI) and overdose (OD), to unify distant bodies of literature, and to enhance prevention and treatment for opioid OD among individuals with BI. BACKGROUND: There is a hidden epidemic of undiagnosed BI in the United States. Due to lack of screening, the vast majority of BI sufferers do not know they have a BI. Not only are those with BI at elevated risk for opioid use, misuse, and opioid use disorder, but also they are at elevated risk for OD. Conversely, those with OUD and those who experienced an OD, are more likely to sustain BI. Key Findings/Conclusions: The existing literature suggests that primary strategies to reduce ABI (Acquired Brain Injury)/TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) harms involve addressing: screening, stigma, racial disparities, and popular misconceptions about OD. The association between TBI and OD is an underexamined public health issue, exacerbated by the bidirectional nature of the relationship. Not only is TBI a risk factor for opioid OD; opioid OD was also found to be a major cause of ABI, which can have lifelong effects similar to Alzheimer's disease. Screening tools for BI were underutilized and inconsistently implemented across reviewed studies. Enhanced screening population wide is a promising intervention, complemented with expanded treatment and research. Black individuals face worse outcomes in BI and treatment outcomes. Anti-racist strategies must fight inequity while addressing social and structural drivers of overdose and BI within the opioid and opioid overdose crises.

Evaluation of self-directed specimen collection for chlamydia and gonorrhea testing among people who use drugs.

Background: People who use drugs (PWUD) often have elevated sexually transmitted infection (STI) risk and unmet healthcare needs. Self-directed STI specimen collection (i.e., individuals collect the specimen and mail to the laboratory) may be valuable in addressing STI testing barriers among PWUD. Methods: Within a cohort study among PWUD in New York City, we conducted a cross-sectional substudy from November 2021-August 2022 assessing sexual health with a one-time online survey (n = 120); participants could opt-in to receive a self-collection kit. Participants who opted-in were mailed a kit containing collection materials (males: urine cup, females: vaginal swab), pre-paid return label, instructions, and educational information. Specimens were sent to the laboratory and tested for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC). We measured the number of kits requested, delivered, mailed to the lab, and CT/GC positive; and examined differences in requesting a kit by sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics. Results: Sixty-three total kits were requested by 44 unique participants. Of the 63 requested, 41 were delivered; one kit was undeliverable at the provided address and the rest were not sent due to no address provided or being duplicate requests. Of the 41 kits delivered, three participants returned the kit to the lab; of those, one was positive for CT and GC. The greatest differences in those who did and did not request a kit were observed by age, sexual orientation, past-year sex trade and casual partnerships, and experiences of relationship violence. Conclusions: Self-directed specimen collection may be desirable for PWUD, but research is needed to understand barriers to this testing approach for this population.

"As safe as possible": a qualitative study of opioid withdrawal and risk behavior among people who use illegal opioids.

BACKGROUND: Opioid withdrawal is a regular occurrence among many people who use illicit opioids (PWUIO) that has also been shown to increase their willingness to engage in risk-involved behavior. The proliferation of fentanyl in the illicit opioid market may have amplified this relationship, potentially putting PWUIO at greater risk of negative health outcomes. Understanding the relationship between withdrawal and risk-involved behavior may also have important implications for the ways that problematic drug use is conceptualized, particularly in disease models of addiction, which position risk behavior as evidence of pathology that helps to justify ontological distinctions between addicts and non-addicts. Examining withdrawal, and its role in PWUIO's willingness to engage in risk, may aid in the development of alternative theories of risk involvement and create discursive spaces for de-medicalizing and de-othering people who use illegal drugs. METHODS: This article is based on 32 semi-structured interviews with PWUIO in the New York City area who also reported recent withdrawal experience. Interviews were conducted remotely between April and August 2022 and recorded for later transcription. Data were then coded and analyzed based on a combination of inductive and deductive coding strategies and informed by the literature. RESULTS: Participants described a strong relationship between withdrawal and their willingness to engage in risk-involved behavior that was exacerbated by the proliferation of fentanyl. Yet, their descriptions did not align with narratives of risk as a product of bad decisions made by individuals. Rather, data demonstrated the substantial role of social and structural context, particularly drug policies like prohibition and criminalization, in the kinds of risks that PWUIO faced and their ability to respond to them. CONCLUSIONS: Withdrawal should be taken more seriously both from an ethical perspective and as an important catalyst of risk behavior. However, theories that position activities taken to avoid withdrawal as irrational and as evidence of pathology are poorly aligned with the complexity of PWUIO's actual lives. We recommend the use of less deterministic and less medicalized theories of risk that better account for differences between how people view the world, and for the role of socio-structural forces in the production of risk.

Pathways to racial disparities in the effects of Good Samaritan Laws: A mixed methods pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Drug overdose deaths continue to rise, and considerable racial inequities have emerged. Overdose Good Samaritan laws (GSLs) are intended to encourage overdose witnesses to seek emergency assistance. However, evidence of their effectiveness is mixed, and little is known regarding racial disparities in their implementation. This study examined GSL impact by assessing racial differences in awareness of and trust in New York state's GSL. METHODS: Using a sequential mixed methods design, Black and white participants were recruited from an existing longitudinal cohort study of people who use illicit opioids in New York City to participate in a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews. Racially stratified survey responses were analyzed using chi-squared tests, Fisher exact tests, or t-tests. Qualitative interviews were analyzed using a hybrid inductive-deductive approach. RESULTS: Participants (n=128) were 56% male and predominantly aged 50 years or older. Most met criteria for severe opioid use disorder (81%). Fifty-seven percent reported that the New York GSL makes them more likely to call 911 even though 42% reported not trusting law enforcement to abide by the GSL; neither differed by race. Black people were less likely to have heard of the GSL (36.1% vs 60%) and were less likely to have accurate information regarding its protections (40.4% vs 49.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Though GSLs may reduce negative impacts of the criminalization of people who use drugs, their implementation may exacerbate existing racial disparities. Resources should be directed towards harm reduction strategies that do not rely on trust in law enforcement.

Racial/ethnic disparities in opioid overdose prevention: comparison of the naloxone care cascade in White, Latinx, and Black people who use opioids in New York City.

BACKGROUND: Drug overdose mortality is rising precipitously among Black people who use drugs. In NYC, the overdose mortality rate is now highest in Black (38.2 per 100,000) followed by the Latinx (33.6 per 100,000) and white (32.7 per 100,000) residents. Improved understanding of access to harm reduction including naloxone across racial/ethnic groups is warranted. METHODS: Using data from an ongoing study of people who use illicit opioids in NYC (N = 575), we quantified racial/ethnic differences in the naloxone care cascade. RESULTS: We observed gaps across the cascade overall in the cohort, including in naloxone training (66%), current possession (53%) daily access during using and non-using days (21%), 100% access during opioid use (20%), and complete protection (having naloxone and someone who could administer it present during 100% of opioid use events; 12%). Naloxone coverage was greater in white (training: 79%, possession: 62%, daily access: 33%, access during use: 27%, and complete protection: 13%, respectively) and Latinx (training: 67%, possession: 54%, daily access: 22%, access during use: 24%, and complete protection: 16%, respectively) versus Black (training: 59%, possession: 48%, daily access:13%, access during use: 12%, and complete protection: 8%, respectively) participants. Black participants, versus white participants, had disproportionately low odds of naloxone training (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22-0.72). Among participants aged 51 years or older, Black race (versus white, the referent) was strongly associated with lower levels of being trained in naloxone use (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07-0.63) and having 100% naloxone access during use (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13-0.91). Compared to white women, Black women had 0.27 times the odds of being trained in naloxone use (95% CI 0.10-0.72). CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient protection by naloxone during opioid use, with disproportionately low access among Black people who use drugs, and a heightened disparity among older Black people and Black women.

How the rural risk environment underpins hepatitis C risk: Qualitative findings from rural southern Illinois, United States.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has increased among persons who inject drugs (PWID) in the United States with disproportionate burden in rural areas. We use the Risk Environment framework to explore potential economic, physical, social, and political determinants of hepatitis C in rural southern Illinois. METHODS: Nineteen in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with PWID from August 2019 through February 2020 (i.e., pre-COVID-19 pandemic) and four with key informants who professionally worked with PWID. Interviews were recorded, professionally transcribed, and coded using qualitative software. We followed a grounded theory approach for coding and analyses. RESULTS: We identify economic, physical, policy, and social factors that may influence HCV transmission risk and serve as barriers to HCV care. Economic instability and lack of economic opportunities, a lack of physically available HCV prevention and treatment services, structural stigma such as policies that criminalize drug use, and social stigma emerged in interviews as potential risks for transmission and barriers to care. CONCLUSION: The rural risk environment framework acknowledges the importance of community and structural factors that influence HCV infection and other disease transmission and care. We find that larger structural factors produce vulnerabilities and reduce access to resources, which negatively impact hepatitis C disease outcomes.

I Don't Believe a Person Has to Die When Trying to Get High: Overdose Prevention and Response Strategies in Rural Illinois.

BACKGROUND: Overdose is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among people who inject drugs. Illicitly manufactured fentanyl is now a major driver of opioid overdose deaths. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 participants (19 persons who inject drugs and 4 service providers) from rural southern Illinois. Data were analyzed using constant comparison and theoretical sampling methods. RESULTS: Participants were concerned about the growing presence of fentanyl in both opioids and stimulants, and many disclosed overdose experiences. Strategies participants reported using to lower overdose risk included purchasing drugs from trusted sellers and modifying drug use practices by partially injecting and/or changing the route of transmission. Approximately half of persons who inject drugs sampled had heard of fentanyl test strips, however fentanyl test strip use was low. To reverse overdoses, participants reported using cold water baths. Use of naloxone to reverse overdose was low. Barriers to naloxone access and use included fear of arrest and opioid withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: People who inject drugs understood fentanyl to be a potential contaminant in their drug supply and actively engaged in harm reduction techniques to try to prevent overdose. Interventions to increase harm reduction education and information about and access to fentanyl test strips and naloxone would be beneficial.

Provider Perspectives on Barriers to Routine HIV Testing of Adolescent and Young Adult Patients in Emergency Department Settings.

HIV testing rates among US youth aged 13-24 years are sub-optimal, with high rates of missed testing opportunities in emergency departments (EDs). We assessed barriers to routine HIV testing of youth in urban ED settings from the perspective of healthcare providers. Ten physicians and nurses were recruited from the pediatric and adult EDs at a high-volume hospital in New York City, USA to complete in-depth interviews to provide their perspectives on barriers to routine HIV testing of youth ages 13 to 24 in EDs. Interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide with questions and probes. All interviews were conducted via Zoom due to the COVID-19 pandemic and were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded independently by two researchers using an inductive thematic analysis approach. Participants often offered HIV testing to youth in the ED based on their perceptions of patients' HIV risk, with pediatric providers sometimes discouraging adolescents they perceived to be at low HIV risk from testing. Participants cited other priorities, logistics of blood-based testing, and discomfort discussing HIV as other reasons for not offering HIV testing to all youth in the ED. Efforts are needed to encourage providers to offer HIV testing to all youth regardless of perceived risk, as the ED often serves as youths' only point of contact with the healthcare system. Emphasis on this and the importance of early detection, along with institutional change, clear guidance, and support for the testing process may help increase youth testing and avoid missed HIV diagnosis opportunities.

Using the participatory education and research into lived experience (PEARLE) methodology to localize content and target specific populations.

Technology-based behavioral health interventions offer potentially limitless opportunities to localize content and target specific populations. However, this ability to customize requires developers to make a wide range of decisions not only about who should appear on screen, but how each message should be refined to most effectively reach a particular group of intervention recipients. These issues become especially salient as interventions are scaled for delivery to multiple populations in different geographical locations or settings (e.g., a hospital emergency department versus the drop-in center of a community-based clinic), and in more than one language. To facilitate evidence-based development of customized, targeted intervention content, our team created a multi-step methodology over a series of NIH-funded research projects. The resulting Participatory Education and Research into Lived Experience (PEARLE) Methodology entails formative qualitative interviews to examine why members of a given population do not enact a specific health behavior such as HIV/HCV testing or vaccinating against COVID-19 (this step includes identifying potential gaps in related health literacy), followed by iterative evaluations of draft content designed to address these barriers, and extensive discussions with a Community Advisory Board. The final step is a clinical trial. PEARLE is designed to be highly flexible, adaptable to a variety of behavioral outcomes in clinical and community settings, and to create content in more than one language depending on the needs or preferences of a population. The current paper discusses how our team employed PEARLE to develop content in English and Spanish for our latest project, which is intended to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake among people who inject drugs.

U.S. Military veterans and the opioid overdose crisis: a review of risk factors and prevention efforts.

U.S. military veterans have been heavily impacted by the opioid overdose crisis, with drug overdose mortality rates increasing by 53% from 2010-2019. Risk for overdose among veterans is complex and influenced by ongoing interaction among physiological/biological, psychological, and socio-structural factors. A thorough understanding of opioid-related overdose among veterans, one that goes beyond simple pharmacological determinism, must examine the interplay of pain, pain treatment, and stress, as well as psychological and social experiences-before, during, and after military service. Comprehensive efforts to tackle the overdose crisis among veterans require interventions that address each of these dimensions. Promising interventions include widespread naloxone distribution and increased provision of low-threshold wrap-around services, including medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and holistic/complementary approaches. Interventions that are delivered by peers - individuals who share key experiential or sociodemographic characteristics with the population being served - may be ideally suited to address many of the barriers to opioid-related risk mitigation common among veterans. Community care models could be beneficial for the large proportion of veterans who are not connected to the Veterans Health Administration and for veterans who, for various reasons including mental health problems and the avoidance of stigma, are socially isolated or reluctant to use traditional substance use services. Interventions need to be tailored in such a way that they reach those more socially isolated veterans who may not have access to naloxone or the social support to help them in overdose situations. It is important to incorporate the perspectives and voices of veterans with lived experience of substance use into the design and implementation of new overdose prevention resources and strategies to meet the needs of this population. Key messagesU.S. military veterans have been heavily impacted by the opioid overdose crisis, with drug overdose mortality rates increasing by 53% from 2010-2019.The risks for overdose that veterans face need to be understood as resulting from an ongoing interaction among biological/physiological, psychological, and social/structural factors.Addressing drug overdose in the veteran population requires accessible and non-judgemental, low threshold, wraparound, and holistic solutions that recognise the complex aetiology of overdose risk for veterans.

"I Didn't Know What They're Gonna Do to Me: So That's Why I Said No": Why Youth Decline HIV Testing in Emergency Departments.

Youth between the ages of 13 and 24 account for over 20% of new HIV diagnoses in the United States but are the least likely age group to be HIV tested in healthcare settings including the emergency department. This is in part due to the fact that almost 50% of youth decline testing when offered. We elucidated youth patients' perspectives on barriers to and facilitators of routine HIV testing of youth in an urban emergency department setting. Thirty-seven patients aged 13-24 years were recruited from the pediatric and adult emergency departments at a high-volume hospital in New York City from August 2019 to March 2020. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with all participants. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and transcripts were coded using an inductive thematic analysis approach. Youths' main reasons for declining HIV testing when offered included low risk perception, privacy concerns, HIV-related stigma, and low levels of HIV-related knowledge. Participants' responses suggested that HIV educational materials provided when testing is offered may be insufficient. Participants recommended providing additional HIV education and better incorporating HIV testing into the emergency department routine to increase testing among youth. Efforts are needed to help youth recognize their own HIV risk and increase their HIV-related knowledge. This may be accomplished by providing youth with additional educational materials on HIV, possibly via tablet-based interventions or other methods that may enhance privacy, combined with discussions with healthcare providers. Such efforts may help increase HIV testing acceptance among youth seen in the emergency department.

Parenting and childcare responsibilities, harm reduction service engagement, and opioid overdose among women and men who use illicit opioids in New York City.

Background: Little is known regarding relationships among parenting, engagement in harm reduction services, and overdose risk among people who use illicit opioids (PWUIO), and whether associations differ by gender. Methods: Using baseline data from an ongoing study among PWUIO in New York City (n = 575), we measured childcare factors (i.e., residing with children, avoidance of drug treatment for fear of child welfare, difficulty accessing harm reduction due to childcare issues), and harm reduction services and overdose-related outcomes. Among those with children, we estimated prevalence ratios (PR) using modified Poisson regression with a product-interaction term for gender differences. Results: In the total sample (n = 575), approximately 70% reported having children. Compared to men, women were more likely to reside with children (25% vs 36%; p-value = 0.04), avoid treatment for fear of child welfare (16% vs 26%; p-value = 0.04), and less likely to be trained in naloxone administration (68% vs 61%; p-value = 0.09). Among participants with children (n = 403), residing with children was associated with naloxone training among men (aPR 1.28, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.62). Avoiding treatment for fear of child welfare was associated with carrying naloxone overall (aPR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.99), with a stronger association among women (aPR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.92). Difficulty accessing services due to childcare was associated with lifetime overdose (aPR 1.53, 95% CI: 1.05, 2.23). Conclusion: Childcare responsibilities may be a barrier for accessing substance use services and treatment for men and women. Further qualitative and mixed-methods research is needed to understand how to make treatment and services accessible for parents.

Naloxone protection, social support, network characteristics, and overdose experiences among a cohort of people who use illicit opioids in New York City.

BACKGROUND: Despite increased availability of take-home naloxone, many people who use opioids do so in unprotected contexts, with no other person who might administer naloxone present, increasing the likelihood that an overdose will result in death. Thus, there is a social nature to being "protected" from overdose mortality, which highlights the importance of identifying background factors that promote access to protective social networks among people who use opioids. METHODS: We used respondent-driven sampling to recruit adults residing in New York City who reported recent (past 3-day) nonmedical opioid use (n = 575). Participants completed a baseline assessment that included past 30-day measures of substance use, overdose experiences, and number of "protected" opioid use events, defined as involving naloxone and the presence of another person who could administer it, as well as measures of network characteristics and social support. We used modified Poisson regression with robust variance to estimate unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: 66% of participants had ever been trained to administer naloxone, 18% had used it in the past three months, and 32% had experienced a recent overdose (past 30 days). During recent opioid use events, 64% reported never having naloxone and a person to administer present. This was more common among those: aged ≥ 50 years (PR: 1.18 (CI 1.03, 1.34); who identified as non-Hispanic Black (PR: 1.27 (CI 1.05, 1.53); experienced higher levels of stigma consciousness (PR: 1.13 (CI 1.00, 1.28); and with small social networks (< 5 persons) (APR: 1.14 (CI 0.98, 1.31). Having a recent overdose experience was associated with severe opioid use disorder (PR: 2.45 (CI 1.49, 4.04), suicidality (PR: 1.72 (CI 1.19, 2.49), depression (PR: 1.54 (CI 1.20, 1.98) and positive urinalysis result for benzodiazepines (PR: 1.56 (CI 1.23, 1.96), but not with network size. CONCLUSIONS: Results show considerable gaps in naloxone protection among people who use opioids, with more vulnerable and historically disadvantaged subpopulations less likely to be protected. Larger social networks of people who use opioids may be an important resource to curtail overdose mortality, but more effort is needed to harness the protective aspects of social networks.

Evaluation of an Experimental Web-based Educational Module on Opioid-related Occupational Safety Among Police Officers: Protocol for a Randomized Pragmatic Trial to Minimize Barriers to Overdose Response.

BACKGROUND: As drug-related morbidity and mortality continue to surge, police officers are on the front lines of the North American overdose (OD) crisis. Drug law enforcement shapes health risks among people who use drugs (PWUD), while also impacting the occupational health and wellness of officers. Effective interventions to align law enforcement practices with public health and occupational safety goals remain underresearched. OBJECTIVE: The Opioids and Police Safety Study (OPS) aims to shift police practices relating to PWUD. It adapts and evaluates the relative effectiveness of a curriculum that bundles content on public health promotion with occupational risk reduction (ORR) to supplement a web-based OD response and naloxone training platform (GetNaloxoneNow.org, or GNN). This novel approach has the potential to improve public health and occupational safety practices, including using naloxone to reverse ODs, referring PWUD to treatment and other supportive services, and avoiding syringe confiscation. METHODS: This longitudinal study uses a randomized pragmatic trial design. A sample of 300 active-duty police officers from select counties in Pennsylvania, Vermont, and New Hampshire with high OD fatality rates will be randomized (n=150 each) to either the experimental arm (GNN + OPS) or the control arm (GNN + COVID-19 ORR). A pre- and posttraining survey will be administered to all 300 officers, after which they will be administered quarterly surveys for 12 months. A subsample of police officers will also be qualitatively followed in a simultaneous embedded mixed-methods approach. Research ethics approval was obtained from the New York University Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: Results will provide an understanding of the experiences, knowledge, and perceptions of this sample of law enforcement personnel. Generalized linear models will be used to analyze differences in key behavioral outcomes between the participants in each of the 2 study arms and across multiple time points (anticipated minimum effect size to be detected, d=0.50). Findings will be disseminated widely, and the training products will be available nationally once the study is completed. CONCLUSIONS: The OPS is the first study to longitudinally assess the impact of a web-based opioid-related ORR intervention for law enforcement in the U.S. Our randomized pragmatic clinical trial aims to remove barriers to life-saving police engagement with PWUD/people who inject drugs by focusing both on the safety of law enforcement and evidence-based and best practices for working with persons at risk of an opioid OD. Our simultaneous embedded mixed-methods approach will provide empirical evaluation of the diffusion of the naloxone-based response among law enforcement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrail.gov NCT05008523; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT05008523. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/33451.

How Vaccine Ambivalence Can Lead People Who Inject Drugs to Decline COVID-19 Vaccination and Ways This Can Be Addressed: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs are disproportionately impacted by SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, yet they do not frequently accept vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 when offered. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore why people who inject drugs decline free vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and how barriers to vaccination can potentially be addressed. METHODS: We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with 17 unvaccinated adult persons who inject drugs during August and September 2021 at a New York City syringe service program, where approximately three-fourth of participants identified as Latino (55%) or African American (22%). Interviews lasted roughly 20 minutes. The interview guide examined reasons for declining vaccination, participants' understanding of COVID-19 risks, and how messages could be developed to encourage vaccine uptake among people who inject drugs. RESULTS: Participants acknowledged that they faced increased risk from SARS-CoV-2 owing to their injection drug use but feared that long-term substance use may have weakened their health, making them especially vulnerable to side effects. Fears of possible side effects, compounded by widespread medical mistrust and questions about the overall value of vaccination contributed to marked ambivalence among our sample. The desire to protect children and older family members emerged as key potential facilitators of vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Community-developed messages are needed in outreach efforts to explain the importance of vaccination, including the far greater dangers of COVID-19 compared to possible unintended side effects. Messages that emphasize vaccines' ability to prevent inadvertently infecting loved ones, may help increase uptake. Community-focused messaging strategies, such as those used to increase HIV and hepatitis C virus testing and overdose prevention among people who inject drugs, may prove similarly effective.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the health of people who use illicit opioids in New York City, the first 12 months.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent opioid-related overdose and COVID-19 crises in the U.S. have imposed unprecedented challenges on people who use illicit opioids. METHODS: Using the experiences of 324 people who use illicit opioids between April 2020 and March 2021, we examined four domains of health and well-being potentially impacted by COVID-19: drug risks and responses, healthcare and related services, material hardship, and mental health. Data were drawn from participants' completed monthly survey assessments which were grouped into four periods of interest for the unfolding pandemic: April-June 2020, July-October 2020, November-January 2021, and February-March 2021. RESULTS: A majority of measures in our four domains showed early COVID-19 related impacts, which quickly diminished as people and agencies responded to the pandemic. Difficulty obtaining food was the most frequently reported material hardship and appeared worst in April-June 2020. Over half of the population reported depression in April-June 2020, but this declined over the study period. Some participants reported changes to the heroin supply, including higher prices, lower quality, difficulty finding the drug, and fentanyl contamination. There was no discernable temporal shift in the frequency of use of each substance or the frequency of withdrawal symptoms. Over the study period, the mean number of overdoses per month decreased while the percent of opioid use events at which both a witness and naloxone were present (i.e., protected events) increased. Most participants receiving MOUD experienced an increase in take-home doses. CONCLUSIONS: Findings speak to the resilience of people who use drugs as a population with disproportionate experience of trauma and crisis and also to the rapid response of NYC health agencies and service providers working with this population. Despite evident signs of adaptability and resilience, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted some of the unique vulnerabilities of people who use illicit opioids and the need for greater rates of "protected" opioid use and greater availability of wrap-around services to efficiently address the safety, food security, mental health, and treatment needs of the population.

Validation of the Opioid Overdose Risk Behavior Scale, version 2 (ORBS-2).

OBJECTIVE: To examine the factor structure of a revised and expanded opioid overdose risk behavior scale and assess its associations with known overdose indicators and other clinical constructs. BACKGROUND: Opioid-related overdose remains high in the U.S. We lack strong instrumentation for assessing behavioral risk factors. We revised and expanded the opioid overdose risk behavior scale (ORBS-1) for use among a broader range of people who use opioids. SETTING & SAMPLING FRAME: Using respondent-driven sampling we recruited adults (18+) reporting current unprescribed opioid use and New York City residence. METHOD: Participants (N = 575) completed the ORBS-1, ORBS-2, and a variety of clinical measures and then completed the ORBS-2 and overdose risk outcomes across monthly follow-up assessments over a 13-month period. RESULTS: Principal components analysis was used to identify six ORBS-2 subscales, Prescription Opioid Misuse, Risky Non-Injection Use, Injection Drug Use, Concurrent Opioid and Benzodiazepine Use, Concurrent Opioid and Alcohol Use, and Multiple-Drug Polysubstance Use. All subscales showed moderate non-parametric correlations with the ORBS-1 and with corresponding clinical constructs. Five of the subscales were significantly (p < .01) positively associated with self-reported non-fatal overdose. Of note, the Risky Non-Injection Use subscale was the most strongly associated with past-month overdose indicators. CONCLUSIONS: Psychometrics for the opioid overdose risk behavior subscales identified suggest the ongoing utility of risk behavioral instrumentation for epidemiological research and clinical practice focused on risk communication and minimization. Use of the entire ORBS-2 measure can provide insight into the proximal/behavioral factors of greatest concern to reduce overdose mortality.

Naloxone's role in the national opioid crisis-past struggles, current efforts, and future opportunities.

Over the past 25 years, naloxone has emerged as a critical lifesaving overdose antidote. Public health advocates and community activists established early methods for naloxone distribution to people who inject drugs, but a legacy of stigmatization and opposition to universal naloxone access continues to limit the drug's full potential to reduce opioid-related mortality. The establishment of naloxone distribution programs under the umbrella of syringe exchange programs faces the same practical, ideological and financial barriers to expansion similar to those faced by syringe exchange programs themselves. The expansion of naloxone from the confines of a few syringe exchange programs to what we see today represents an enormous triumph for the grass-roots activists, service providers, and public health professionals who have fought to guarantee lay access to naloxone. Despite the extensive efforts to expand access to naloxone, naloxone continues to remains a scarce resource in many US localities. Considerable naloxone "deserts" remain and even where there is naloxone access, it does not always reach those at risk. Promising areas for expansion include the development of more robust telehealth methods for naloxone distribution, including subsidized mail delivery programs; lowering barriers to pharmacy access; working with hospitals, ambulances, and law enforcement to expand naloxone "leave behind" programs; providing naloxone co-prescription with medications for opioid use disorder; and working with prisons, shelters, and networks of people who use drugs to increase access to the lifesaving medication. Efforts to ensure over-the-counter and low- or no-cost naloxone are ongoing and stand alongside medication-assisted treatments as efficacious, readily-actionable, and cost-efficient population-level interventions available for combatting opioid-related overdose in the United States.