The perspectives of people who use drugs regarding short term involuntary substance use care for severe substance use disorders.

BACKGROUND: In the Canadian Province of British Columbia (BC), the BC Mental Health Act permits involuntary care for treating mental disorders. However, the Act has also been applied to provide involuntary care to individuals with a primary substance use disorder, in the absence of specific guidelines and legislation, and with insufficient understanding of perspectives of people who use drugs (PWUD) regarding this approach. METHODS: As part of a larger mixed-methods research project providing an overview of involuntary care for severe substance use disorders in BC, three focus groups were convened with: PWUD, families and caregivers, and Indigenous community stakeholders. This analysis examines perspectives from the focus group of PWUD, consisting of nine participants from local and regional drug user and advocacy organizations regarding involuntary care. A qualitative descriptive approach and thematic analysis were conducted, using a coding framework developed deductively and inductively, and participant perspectives were interpreted drawing on problematization theory. RESULTS: Participants did not endorse the use of involuntary care, instead emphasizing significant changes were needed to address shortcomings of the wider voluntary care system. When asked to conceptualize what an acceptable involuntary care scenario might look like (under hypothetical and ideal conditions), participants recommended it should include: individual control and autonomy, peer advocacy in decision-making, and elimination of police and criminal justice system involvement from treatment encounters. Participants saw involuntary care to be an inappropriate approach given the shortcomings of the current system, noting also problems inherent in its use to manage severe SUDs and imminent harm, and prioritized alternate approaches to offsetting risks. CONCLUSION: Improving voluntary care for substance use, along with addressing the social determinants of health that put individuals at risk of problematic substance use and harm, were prioritized in participant perspectives. Participant comments regarding the use of involuntary care bring forward alternate solutions in the context of the opioid overdose crisis, and a reconceptualization of the 'problem' of managing severe substance use disorders.

Reprint of: The regulation project: Tools for engaging the public in the legal regulation of drugs.

Lack of legal regulation and oversight of scheduled drugs in Canada has led to an unsafe drug supply responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands. In addition to contributing to the worst unregulated drug poisoning crisis in Canada's history, the policy framework prohibiting non-medical access to certain drugs has exacerbated numerous public health and safety concerns. An alternative approach to prohibition is for government to retake control of the currently illegal drug market through legal regulatory mechanisms. This paper presents the work of an ongoing international collaboration of organizations advocating legal regulation and some of the knowledge translation tools used to educate and engage the public on legal regulation within Canada. In order to encourage thinking and decision-making among stakeholders in a productive way, models of legal regulation for various substances were created as discussion tools to emerge values and considerations supporting different approaches. The models focus on five questions: 1) who has access to drugs; 2) how access is obtained; 3) where drugs can be accessed; 4) how much people can obtain; and 5) where drugs can be consumed. The models were presented to stakeholders in the context of an international meeting on legal regulation, and then adapted to a more "user-friendly" form: a collaborative negotiation-based Regulation Game, which was presented at a workshop in Montréal, Canada. Engaging different stakeholder groups on policy choices of legal regulation revealed initial barriers that we feel more confident can be overcome through creative and innovative tools such as the Regulation Game. Use of the game as a foundation for more traditional focus groups could be effective in reducing barriers to fulsome policy discussions on legal regulation.

Public support for harm reduction: A population survey of Canadian adults.

We described public views toward harm reduction among Canadian adults and tested a social exposure model predicting support for these contentious services, drawing on theories in the morality policy, intergroup relations, addiction, and media communication literatures. A quota sample of 4645 adults (18+ years), randomly drawn from an online research panel and stratified to match age and sex distributions of adults within and across Canadian provinces, was recruited in June 2018. Participants completed survey items assessing support for harm reduction for people who use drugs (PWUD) and for seven harm reduction interventions. Additional items assessed exposure to media coverage on harm reduction, and scales assessing stigma toward PWUD (α = .72), personal familiarity with PWUD (α = .84), and disease model beliefs about addiction (α = .79). Most (64%) Canadians supported harm reduction (provincial estimates = 60% - 73%). Five of seven interventions received majority support, including: outreach (79%), naloxone (72%), drug checking (70%), needle distribution (60%) and supervised drug consumption (55%). Low-threshold opioid agonist treatment and safe inhalation interventions received less support (49% and 44%). Our social exposure model, adjusted for respondent sex, household income, political views, and education, exhibited good fit and accounted for 17% of variance in public support for harm reduction. Personal familiarity with PWUD and disease model beliefs about addiction were directly associated with support (ßs = .07 and -0.10, respectively), and indirectly influenced public support via stigmatized attitudes toward PWUD (ßs = 0.01 and -0.01, respectively). Strategies to increase support for harm reduction could problematize certain disease model beliefs (e.g., "There are only two possibilities for an alcoholic or drug addict-permanent abstinence or death") and creating opportunities to reduce social distance between PWUD, the public, and policy makers.

The regulation project: Tools for engaging the public in the legal regulation of drugs.

Lack of legal regulation and oversight of scheduled drugs in Canada has led to an unsafe drug supply responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands. In addition to contributing to the worst unregulated drug poisoning crisis in Canada's history, the policy framework prohibiting non-medical access to certain drugs has exacerbated numerous public health and safety concerns. An alternative approach to prohibition is for government to retake control of the currently illegal drug market through legal regulatory mechanisms. This paper presents the work of an ongoing international collaboration of organizations advocating legal regulation and some of the knowledge translation tools used to educate and engage the public on legal regulation within Canada. In order to encourage thinking and decision-making among stakeholders in a productive way, models of legal regulation for various substances were created as discussion tools to emerge values and considerations supporting different approaches. The models focus on five questions: 1) who has access to drugs; 2) how access is obtained; 3) where drugs can be accessed; 4) how much people can obtain; and 5) where drugs can be consumed. The models were presented to stakeholders in the context of an international meeting on legal regulation, and then adapted to a more "user-friendly" form: a collaborative negotiation-based Regulation Game, which was presented at a workshop in Montréal, Canada. Engaging different stakeholder groups on policy choices of legal regulation revealed initial barriers that we feel more confident can be overcome through creative and innovative tools such as the Regulation Game. Use of the game as a foundation for more traditional focus groups could be effective in reducing barriers to fulsome policy discussions on legal regulation.

Media coverage of harm reduction, 2000-2016: A content analysis of tone, topics, and interventions in Canadian print news.

BACKGROUND: Harm reduction interventions reduce mortality and morbidity for people who use drugs (PWUD), but are contentious and haphazardly implemented. This study describes volume and content of Canadian newspaper coverage of harm reduction produced from 2000 to 2016. METHODS: Searches of 54 English-language newspapers identified 5681 texts, coded for type (news reports, opinion pieces), tone (positive, negative, or neutral/balanced coverage), topic (health, crime, social welfare, and political perspectives on harm reduction), and seven harm reduction interventions. RESULTS: Volume of coverage doubled in 2008 (after removal of harm reduction from federal drug policy and legal challenges to Vancouver's supervised consumption program) and quadrupled in 2016 (tracking Canada's opioid emergency). Health perspectives on harm reduction were most common (39% of texts) while criminal perspectives were rare (3%). Negative coverage was over 10 times more common in opinion pieces (31%) compared to news reports (3%); this trend was more pronounced in British Columbia and Alberta, a region particularly affected by Canada's opioid emergency. Supervised drug consumption accounted for 49% of all newspaper coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Although federal policy support for harm reduction waxed and waned over 17 years, Canadian newspapers independently shaped public discourse, frequently characterizing harm reduction positively/neutrally and from a health perspective. However, issue framing and agenda setting was also evident: supervised drug consumption offered in a single Canadian city crowded out coverage of all other harm reduction services, except for naloxone. This narrow sense of 'newsworthiness' obscured public discourse on the full spectrum of evidence-based harm reduction services that could benefit PWUD.

Telling our stories: heroin-assisted treatment and SNAP activism in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver.

BACKGROUND: This article highlights the experiences of a peer-run group, SALOME/NAOMI Association of Patients (SNAP), that meets weekly in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. SNAP is a unique independent peer- run drug user group that formed in 2011 following Canada's first heroin-assisted treatment trial (HAT), North America Opiate Medication Initiative (NAOMI). SNAP's members are now made up of former research participants who participated in two heroin-assisted trials in Vancouver. This article highlights SNAP members' experiences as research subjects in Canada's second clinical trial conducted in Vancouver, Study to Assess Longer-term Opioid Medication Effectiveness (SALOME), that began recruitment of research participants in 2011. METHODS: This paper draws on one brainstorming session, three focus groups, and field notes, with the SALOME/NAOMI Association of Patients (SNAP) in late 2013 about their experiences as research subjects in Canada's second clinical trial, SALOME in the DTES of Vancouver, and fieldwork from a 6-year period (March 2011 to February 2017) with SNAP members. SNAP's research draws on research principles developed by drug user groups and critical methodological frameworks on community-based research for social justice. RESULTS: The results illuminate how participating in the SALOME clinical trial impacted the lives of SNAP members. In addition, the findings reveal how SNAP member's advocacy for HAT impacts the group in positive ways. Seven major themes emerged from the analysis of the brainstorming and focus groups: life prior to SALOME, the clinic setting and routine, stability, 6-month transition, support, exiting the trial and ethics, and collective action, including their participation in a constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court of BC to continue receiving HAT once the SALOME trial ended. CONCLUSIONS: HAT benefits SNAP members. They argue that permanent HAT programs should be established in Canada because they are an effective harm reduction initiative, one that also reduces opioid overdose deaths.

Canadian harm reduction policies: A comparative content analysis of provincial and territorial documents, 2000-2015.

BACKGROUND: Access to harm reduction interventions among substance users across Canada is highly variable, and largely within the policy jurisdiction of the provinces and territories. This study systematically described variation in policy frameworks guiding harm reduction services among Canadian provinces and territories as part of the first national multimethod case study of harm reduction policy. METHODS: Systematic and purposive searches identified publicly-accessible policy texts guiding planning and organization of one or more of seven targeted harm reduction services: needle distribution, naloxone, supervised injection/consumption, low-threshold opioid substitution (or maintenance) treatment, buprenorphine/naloxone (suboxone), drug checking, and safer inhalation kits. A corpus of 101 documents written or commissioned by provincial/territorial governments or their regional health authorities from 2000 to 2015 were identified and verified for relevance by a National Reference Committee. Texts were content analyzed using an a priori governance framework assessing managerial roles and functions, structures, interventions endorsed, client characteristics, and environmental variables. RESULTS: Nationally, few (12%) of the documents were written to expressly guide harm reduction services or resources as their primary named purpose; most documents included harm reduction as a component of broader addiction and/or mental health strategies (43%) or blood-borne pathogen strategies (43%). Most documents (72%) identified roles and responsibilities of health service providers, but fewer declared how services would be funded (56%), specified a policy timeline (38%), referenced supporting legislation (26%), or received endorsement from elected members of government (16%). Nonspecific references to 'harm reduction' appeared an average of 12.8 times per document-far more frequently than references to specific harm reduction interventions (needle distribution=4.6 times/document; supervised injection service=1.4 times/document). Low-threshold opioid substitution, safer inhalation kits, drug checking, and buprenorphine/naloxone were virtually unmentioned. Two cases (Quebec and BC) produced about half of all policy documents, while 6 cases - covering parts of Atlantic and Northern Canada - each produced three or fewer. CONCLUSION: Canada exhibited wide regional variation in policies guiding the planning and organization of Canadian harm reduction services, with some areas of the country producing few or no policies. Despite a wealth of effectiveness and health economic research demonstrating the value of specific harm reduction interventions, policies guiding Canada from 2000 to 2015 did not stake out harm reduction interventions as a distinct, legitimate health service domain.

Illicit drug use and harms, and related interventions and policy in Canada: A narrative review of select key indicators and developments since 2000.

BACKGROUND: By the year 2000, Canada faced high levels of illicit drug use and related harms. Simultaneously, a fundamental tension had raisen between continuing a mainly repression-based versus shifting to a more health-oriented drug policy approach. Despite a wealth of new data and numerous individual studies that have emerged since then, no comprehensive review of key indicators and developments of illicit drug use/harm epidemiology, interventions and law/policy exist; this paper seeks to fill this gap. METHODS: We searched and reviewed journal publications, as well as key reports, government publications, surveys, etc. reporting on data and information since 2000. Relevant data were selected and extracted for review inclusion, and subsequently grouped and narratively summarized in major topical sub-theme categories. RESULTS: Cannabis use has remained the principal form of illicit drug use; prescription opioid misuse has arisen as a new and extensive phenomenon. While new drug-related blood-borne-virus transmissions declined, overdose deaths increased in recent years. Acceptance and proliferation of - mainly local/community-based - health measures (e.g., needle exchange, crack paraphernalia or naloxone distribution) aiming at high-risk drug users has evolved, though reach and access limitations have persisted; Vancouver's 'supervised injection site' has attracted continued attention yet remains un-replicated elsewhere in Canada. While opioid maintenance treatment utilization increased, access to treatment for key (e.g., infectious disease, psychiatric) co-morbidities among drug users remained limited. Law enforcement continued to principally focus on cannabis and specifically cannabis users. 'Drug treatment courts' were introduced but have shown limited effectiveness; several attempts cannabis control law reform have failed, except for the recent establishment of 'medical cannabis' access provisions. CONCLUSIONS: While recent federal governments introduced several law and policy measures reinforcing a repression approach to illicit drug use, lower-level jurisdictions (e.g., provincial/municipal levels) and non-governmental organizations increasingly promoted social- and health-oriented intervention frameworks and interventions, therefore creating an increasingly bifurcated - and inherently contradictory - drug policy landscape and reality in Canada.