Implementation of pharmaceutical alternatives to a toxic drug supply in British Columbia: A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: North America has been in an unrelenting overdose crisis for almost a decade. British Columbia (BC), Canada declared a public health emergency due to overdoses in 2016. Risk Mitigation Guidance (RMG) for prescribing pharmaceutical opioids, stimulants and benzodiazepine alternatives to the toxic drug supply ("safer supply") was implemented in March 2020 in an attempt to reduce harms of COVID-19 and overdose deaths in BC during dual declared public health emergencies. Our objective was to describe early implementation of RMG among prescribers in BC. METHODS: We conducted a convergent mixed methods study drawing population-level linked administrative health data and qualitative interviews with 17 prescribers. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) informs our work. The study utilized seven linked databases, capturing the characteristics of prescribers for people with substance use disorder to describe the characteristics of those prescribing under the RMG using univariate summary statistics and logistic regression analysis. For the qualitative analysis, we drew on interpretative descriptive methodology to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. RESULTS: Analysis of administrative databases demonstrated limited uptake of the intervention outside large urban centres and a highly specific profile of urban prescribers, with larger and more complex caseloads associated with RMG prescribing. Nurse practitioners were three times more likely to prescribe than general practitioners. Qualitatively, the study identified five themes related to the five CFIR domains: 1) RMG is helpful but controversial; 2) Motivations and challenges to prescribing; 3) New options and opportunities for care but not enough to 'win the arms race'; 4) Lack of implementation support and resources; 5) Limited infrastructure. CONCLUSIONS: BC's implementation of RMG was limited in scope, prescriber uptake and geographic scale up. Systemic, organizational and individual barriers and facilitators point to the importance of engaging professional regulatory colleges, implementation planning and organizational infrastructure to ensure effective implementation and adaptation to context.

Equity-oriented frameworks to inform responses to opioid overdoses: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this scoping review was to systematically identify and describe literature that uses a health equity-oriented approach for preventing and reducing the harms of stigma or overdose for people who use illicit drugs or misuse prescription opioids. INCLUSION CRITERIA: To be included, papers had to both: i) use a health equity-oriented approach, defined as a response that addresses health inequities and aims to reduce drug-related harms of stigma or overdose; and ii) include at least one of the following concepts: cultural safety, trauma- and violence-informed care, or harm reduction. We also looked for papers that included an Indigenous-informed perspective in addition to any of the three concepts. METHODS: An a priori protocol was published and the JBI methodology for conducting scoping reviews was employed. Published and unpublished literature from January 1, 2000, to July 31, 2019, was included. The databases searched included CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (Ovid), Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), Sociological Abstracts and Social Services Abstracts (ProQuest), JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO, Aboriginal Health Abstract Database, First Nations Periodical Index, and the National Indigenous Studies Portal. The search for unpublished studies included ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Google Scholar, and targeted web searches. Screening and data extraction were performed by two reviewers using templates developed by the authors. Data extraction included specific details about the population, concepts, context, and key findings or recommendations relevant to the review objectives. RESULTS: A total of a total of 1065 articles were identified and screened, with a total of 148 articles included. The majority were published in the previous five years (73%) and were from North America (78%). Most articles only focused on one of the three health equity-oriented approaches, most often harm reduction (n = 79), with only 16 articles including all three. There were 14 articles identified that also included an Indigenous-informed perspective. Almost one-half of the papers were qualitative (n = 65; 44%) and 26 papers included a framework. Of these, seven papers described a framework that included all three approaches, but none included an Indigenous-informed perspective. Recommendations for health equity-oriented approaches are: i) inclusion of people with lived and living experience; ii) multifaceted approaches to reduce stigma and discrimination; iii) recognize and address inequities; iv) drug policy reform and decriminalization; v) ensure harm-reduction principles are applied within comprehensive responses; and vi) proportionate universalism. Gaps in knowledge and areas for future research are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified few conceptual frameworks that are both health equity-oriented and incorporate multiple concepts that could enrich responses to the opioid poisoning emergency. More research is required to evaluate the impact of these integrated frameworks for action.

Health equity-oriented approaches to inform responses to opioid overdoses: a scoping review protocol.

REVIEW QUESTION/OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this scoping review is to systematically identify and describe literature that uses a health equity-oriented (HEO) approach for preventing and reducing the harms of stigma or overdose for people who use illicit drugs or misuse prescription opioids.The question of the review is: What is currently known about the use of an HEO approach for preventing the harms of stigma or overdose when people use illicit or street drugs, or use prescription opioids for other than their intended purposes?Specifically, the review objectives are.