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.

Association of Illicit Fentanyl Use with Injection Risk Practices Among People who Inject Drugs.

We investigated the association between fentanyl injection frequency and sharing of injection equipment among people who inject drugs. We surveyed 249 people who inject drugs in Toronto in 2019. We estimated predicted probabilities of associations between fentanyl injection frequency and injection risk practices. In prior 6 months, 117 (47.0%) of participants injected fentanyl daily, 49 (19.7%) less than daily, and 78 (31.3%) did not inject fentanyl. Participants who injected fentanyl daily shared syringes more often than those not injecting fentanyl (25.0% vs. 4.9%; χ2 = 11.54, p = 0.0007). Participants who injected fentanyl daily (42.4% vs. 11.3%; χ2 = 18.05, p < 0.0001) and less than daily (37.2% vs. 11.3%; χ2 = 5.88 p = 0.02) shared cookers more often than those not injecting fentanyl. Participants who injected fentanyl daily (30.2% vs. 9.7%; χ2 = 9.05, p = 0.003) and less than daily (30.3% vs. 9.7%; χ2 = 4.11, p = 0.04) shared filters more often than those not injecting fentanyl. No differences in probabilities of sharing equipment were detected between participants who injected fentanyl daily and less than daily. People using fentanyl reported injection practices that increased risk for infectious disease transmission.

Considerations for the design of overdose education and naloxone distribution interventions: results of a multi-stakeholder workshop.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdose epidemic is a public health crisis that is impacting communities around the world. Overdose education and naloxone distribution programs equip and train lay people to respond in the event of an overdose. We aimed to understand factors to consider for the design of naloxone distribution programs in point-of-care settings from the point of view of community stakeholders. METHODS: We hosted a multi-stakeholder co-design workshop to elicit suggestions for a naloxone distribution program. We recruited people with lived experience of opioid overdose, community representatives, and other stakeholders from family practice, emergency medicine, addictions medicine, and public health to participate in a full-day facilitated co-design discussion wherein large and small group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic approaches. RESULTS: A total of twenty-four participants participated in the multi-stakeholder workshop from five stakeholder groups including geographic and setting diversity. Collaborative dialogue and shared storytelling revealed seven considerations for the design of naloxone distribution programs specific to training needs and the provision of naloxone, these are: recognizing overdose, how much naloxone, impact of stigma, legal risk of responding, position as conventional first aid, friends and family as responders, support to call 911. CONCLUSION: To create an naloxone distribution program in emergency departments, family practice and substance use treatment services, stigma is a central design consideration for training and naloxone kits. Design choices that reference the iconography, type, and form of materials associated with first aid have the potential to satisfy the need to de-stigmatize overdose response.

Impact of safer supply programs on injection practices: client and provider experiences in Ontario, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Fentanyl has contributed to a sharp rise in the toxicity of the unregulated drug supply and fatal overdoses in Canada. It has also changed injection practices. Injection frequency has increased as a result and so has equipment sharing and health-related risks. The aim of this analysis was to explore the impact of safer supply programs on injection practices from the perspective of clients and providers in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: The data set included qualitative interviews with 52 clients and 21 providers that were conducted between February and October 2021 across four safer supply programs. Interview excerpts discussing injection practices were extracted, screened, coded and then grouped into themes. RESULTS: We identified three themes, each theme corresponding to a change in injection practices. The first change was a decrease in the amount of fentanyl used and a decrease in injection frequency. The second change involved switching to injecting hydromorphone tablets instead of fentanyl. Finally, the third change was stopping injecting altogether and taking safer supply medications orally. CONCLUSION: Safer supply programs can contribute to reducing injection-related health risks in addition to overdose risks. More specifically, they have the potential to address disease prevention and health promotion gaps that stand-alone downstream harm reduction interventions cannot address, by working upstream and providing a safer alternative to fentanyl.

A rapid review of current engagement strategies with people who use drugs in monitoring and reporting on substance use-related harms.

BACKGROUND: The Canadian drug supply has significantly increased in toxicity over the past few years, resulting in the worsening of the overdose crisis. A key initiative implemented during this crisis has been data monitoring and reporting of substance use-related harms (SRH). This literature review aims to: (1) identify strategies used for the meaningful engagement of people who use drugs (PWUD) in local, provincial, and national SRH data system planning, reporting, and action and (2) describe data monitoring and reporting strategies and common indicators of SRH within those systems. METHODS: We searched three academic and five gray literature databases for relevant literature published between 2012 and 2022. Team members who identify as PWUD and a librarian at Public Health Ontario developed search strings collaboratively. Two reviewers screened all search results and applied the eligibility criteria. We used Microsoft Excel for data management. RESULTS: Twenty-two articles met our eligibility criteria (peer-reviewed n = 10 and gray literature reports n = 12); most used qualitative methods and focused on the Canadian context (n = 20). There were few examples of PWUD engaged as authors of reports on SRH monitoring. Among information systems involving PWUD, we found two main strategies: (1) community-based strategies (e.g., word of mouth, through drug sellers, and through satellite workers) and (2) public health-based data monitoring and communication strategies (e.g., communicating drug quality and alerts to PWUD). Substance use-related mortality, hospitalizations, and emergency department visits were the indicators most commonly used in systems of SRH reporting that engaged PWUD. CONCLUSION: This review demonstrates limited engagement of PWUD and silos of activity in existing SRH data monitoring and reporting strategies. Future work is needed to better engage PWUD in these processes in an equitable manner. Building SRH monitoring systems in partnership with PWUD may increase the potential impact of these systems to reduce harms in the community.

Design details for overdose education and take-home naloxone kits: Codesign with family medicine, emergency department, addictions medicine and community.

INTRODUCTION: Overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programmes equip and train people who are likely to witness an opioid overdose to respond with effective first aid interventions. Despite OEND expansion across North America, overdose rates are increasing, raising questions about how to improve OEND programmes. We conducted an iterative series of codesign stakeholder workshops to develop a prototype for take-home naloxone (THN)-kit (i.e., two doses of intranasal naloxone and training on how to administer it). METHODS: We recruited people who use opioids, frontline healthcare providers and public health representatives to participate in codesign workshops covering questions related to THN-kit prototypes, training on how to use it, and implementation, including refinement of design artefacts using personas and journey maps. Completed over 9 months, the workshops were audio-recorded and transcribed with visible results of the workshops (i.e., sticky notes, sketches) archived. We used thematic analyses of these materials to identify design requirements for THN-kits and training. RESULTS: We facilitated 13 codesign workshops to identify and address gaps in existing opioid overdose education training and THN-kits and emphasize timely response and stigma in future THN-kit design. Using an iterative process, we created 15 prototypes, 3 candidate prototypes and a final prototype THN-kit from the synthesis of the codesign workshops. CONCLUSION: The final prototype is available for a variety of implementation and evaluation processes. The THN-kit offers an integrated solution combining ultra-brief training animation and physical packaging of nasal naloxone to be distributed in family practice clinics, emergency departments, addiction medicine clinics and community settings. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The codesign process was deliberately structured to involve community members (the public), with multiple opportunities for public contribution. In addition, patient/public participation was a principle for the management and structuring of the research team.

Supporting community overdose response planning in Ontario, Canada: Findings from a situational assessment.

BACKGROUND: Many communities across North America are coming together to develop comprehensive plans to address and respond to the escalating overdose crisis, largely driven by an increasingly toxic unregulated drug supply. As there is a need to build capacity for successful implementation, the objective of our mixed methods study was to identify the current planning and implementation practices, needs, and priority areas of support for community overdose response plans in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We used a situational assessment methodology to collect data on current planning and implementation practices, needs, and challenges related to community overdose response plans in Ontario, consisting of three components. Between November 2019 to February 2020, we conducted ten semi-structured key informant interviews, three focus groups with 25 participants, and administered an online survey (N = 66). Purposeful sampling was used to identify professionals involved in coordinating, supporting, or partnering on community overdose response plans in jurisdictions with relevant information for Ontario including other Canadian provinces and American states. Key informants included evaluators, representatives involved in centralised supports, as well as coordinators and partners on community overdose response plans. Focus group participants were coordinators or leads of community overdose response plans in Ontario. RESULTS: Sixty-six professionals participated in the study. The current planning and implementation practices of community overdose response plans varied in Ontario. Our analysis generated four overarching areas for needs and support for the planning and implementation of community overdose response plans: 1) data and information; 2) evidence and practice; 3) implementation/operational factors; and 4) partnership, engagement, and collaboration. Addressing stigma and equity within planning and implementation of community overdose response plans was a cross-cutting theme that included meaningful engagement of people with living and lived expertise and meeting the service needs of different populations and communities. CONCLUSIONS: Through exploring the needs and related supports for community overdose response plans in Ontario, we have identified key priority areas for building local capacity building to address overdose-related harms. Ongoing development and refinement, community partnership, and evaluation of our project will highlight the influence of our supports to advance the capacity, motivation, and opportunities of community overdose response plans.

Difficulty accessing supervised consumption services during the COVID-19 pandemic among people who use drugs in Vancouver, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The overdose crisis in Canada has worsened since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although this trend is thought to be driven in part by closures or reduced capacity of supervised consumption services (SCS), little is known about the factors that may impede access to such services during the COVID-19 pandemic among people who use drugs. This study sought to characterize the prevalence and correlates of having difficulty accessing SCS during the COVID-19 pandemic among people who use drugs in Vancouver, Canada. METHODS: Cross-sectional data from two open prospective cohorts of people who use drugs were collected via phone or videoconferencing interviews conducted between July 2020 and November 2020. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to examine factors associated with experiencing difficulty accessing SCS. RESULTS: Among the 428 people who use drugs who participated in the study, 223 (54.7%) self-identified as men and the median age was 51 years (1st to 3rd quartile: 42-58). A total of 58 (13.6%) participants reported experiencing difficulty accessing SCS. In a multivariable analysis, factors positively associated with difficulty accessing SCS included daily crystal methamphetamine use (Adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-5.30), active injection drug use (AOR = 4.06; 95% CI 1.38-11.90), recent non-fatal overdose (AOR = 2.45; 95% CI 1.24-4.85), and unstable housing (AOR = 2.14; 95% CI 1.08-4.23). Age was inversely associated with the outcome (AOR = 0.96; 95% CI 0.93-0.99) in multivariable analyses. The most commonly reported reasons for experiencing difficulty accessing SCS were: COVID-19-related site closure or shortened hours (42.9%) and having to wait too long to use a site (39.3%). CONCLUSIONS: We found that people who use drugs with markers of structural vulnerability and drug-related risk were more likely to experience difficulty accessing SCS during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings point to the need for strategies to support access to such services as part of pandemic response efforts.

Priority setting for Canadian Take-Home Naloxone best practice guideline development: an adapted online Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: Take-Home Naloxone (THN) is a core intervention aimed at addressing the toxic illicit opioid drug supply crisis. Although THN programs are available in all provinces and territories throughout Canada, there are currently no standardized guidelines for THN programs. The Delphi method is a tool for consensus building often used in policy development that allows for engagement of stakeholders. METHODS: We used an adapted anonymous online Delphi method to elicit priorities for a Canadian guideline on THN as a means of facilitating meaningful stakeholder engagement. A guideline development group generated a series of key questions that were then brought to a 15-member voting panel. The voting panel was comprised of people with lived and living experience of substance use, academics specializing in harm reduction, and clinicians and public health professionals from across Canada. Two rounds of voting were undertaken to score questions on importance for inclusion in the guideline. RESULTS: Nine questions that were identified as most important include what equipment should be in THN kits, whether there are important differences between intramuscular and intranasal naloxone administration, how stigma impacts access to distribution programs, how effective THN programs are at saving lives, what distribution models are most effective and equitable, storage considerations for naloxone in a community setting, the role of CPR and rescue breathing in overdose response, client preference of naloxone distribution program type, and what aftercare should be provided for people who respond to overdoses. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi method is an equitable consensus building process that generated priorities to guide guideline development.

Philanthropic donor perspectives about providing harm reduction services for people living with HIV/AIDS in a hospital setting.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-based harm reduction services are needed to reduce drug-related harms, facilitate retention in care, and increase medical treatment adherence for people who use drugs. Philanthropic donor support plays a key role in delivering such innovative services which might fall outside current funding streams. However, little is known about how the principles, implementation, and practice of harm reduction services, which are often highly stigmatized, may impact donor behaviours. We explored this issue within Casey House, a speciality hospital in Toronto, Canada. METHODS: Our mixed methods study utilized an explanatory sequential design. A convenience sample of n = 106 philanthropic individual donors, recruited via email, completed an anonymous web-based survey, between July and October 2020, which assessed their knowledge of harm reduction services and the potential impact of implementing new hospital-based harm reduction services on donors' future support. Following this, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with n = 12 of the donors who completed a survey and volunteered to be interviewed. Interviews examined donors' perspectives about harm reduction and their hopes/concerns for such programming at Casey House. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and participatory-based thematic analysis. RESULTS: Survey data show a high level of support for hospital-based harm reduction services, with participants reporting that they "strongly agree/agree" with providing harm reduction equipment (85%), supervised consumption services (82%), and prescription opioid treatment (76%) at Casey House. A majority of participants (66%) claimed that implementing new harm reduction services at the hospital would not impact their future donation, while 6% said they would be less inclined to donate. Interview participants were supportive of harm reduction services at Casey House, recognizing the benefits of providing such services for hospital clients and the wider community. However, some spoke of the potential impact that implementing hospital-based harm reduction services may have on "other" donors who might be opposed. Although some believed harm reduction services should be fully funded by the government, most saw a role for donors in supporting such services. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show support of hospital-based harm reduction services among philanthropic donors and provide insight into how donor support may be affected when such services are introduced.

Feasibility, acceptability, concerns, and challenges of implementing supervised injection services at a specialty HIV hospital in Toronto, Canada: perspectives of people living with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Substance use significantly impacts health and healthcare of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV), especially their ability to remain in hospital following admission. Supervised injection services (SIS) reduce overdoses and drug-related harms, but are not often provided within hospitals/outpatient programs. Leading us to question, what are PLHIV's perceptions of hospital-based SIS? METHODS: This mixed-methods study explored feasibility and acceptability of implementing SIS at Casey House, a Toronto-based specialty HIV hospital, from the perspective of its in/outpatient clients. We conducted a survey, examining clients' (n = 92) demand for, and acceptability of, hospital-based SIS. Following this, we hosted two focus groups (n = 14) and one-on-one interviews (n = 8) with clients which explored benefits/drawbacks of in-hospital SIS, wherein participants experienced guided tours of a demonstration SIS space and/or presentations of evidence about impacts of SIS. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Among survey participants, 76.1% (n = 70) identified as cis-male and over half (n = 49;54.4%) had been a hospital client for 2 years or less. Nearly half (48.8%) knew about clients injecting in/near Casey House, while 23.6% witnessed it. Survey participants were more supportive of SIS for inpatients (76.1%) than for outpatients (68.5%); most (74.7%) reported SIS implementation would not impact their level of service use at Casey House, while some predicted coming more often (16.1%) and others less often (9.2%). Most focus group/interview participants, believed SIS would enhance safety by reducing health harms (e.g. overdose), increasing transparency between clients and clinicians about substance use, and helping retain clients in care. Debate arose about who (e.g., in/outpatients vs. non-clients) should have access to hospital-based SIS and how implementation may shift organizational priorities/resources away from services not specific to drug use. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed widespread support of, and need for, hospital-based SIS among client stakeholders; however, attempts to reduce negative impacts on non-drug using clients need to be considered in the balance of implementation plans. Given the increased risks of morbidity and mortality for PLHIV who inject drugs as well as the problems in retaining them in care in a hospital setting, SIS is a key component of improving care for this marginalized group.

A qualitative study on overdose response in the era of COVID-19 and beyond: how to spot someone so they never have to use alone.

BACKGROUND: Spotting is an informal practice among people who use drugs (PWUD) where they witness other people using drugs and respond if an overdose occurs. During COVID-19 restrictions, remote spotting (e.g., using a telephone, video call, and/or a social media app) emerged to address physical distancing requirements and reduced access to harm reduction and/or sexually transmitted blood borne infection (STBBI's) prevention services. We explored spotting implementation issues from the perspectives of spotters and spottees. METHODS: Research assistants with lived/living expertise of drug use used personal networks and word of mouth to recruit PWUD from Ontario and Nova Scotia who provided or used informal spotting. All participants completed a semi-structured, audio-recorded telephone interview about spotting service design, benefits, challenges, and recommendations. Recordings were transcribed and thematic analysis was used. RESULTS: We interviewed 20 individuals between 08/2020-11/2020 who were involved in informal spotting. Spotting was provided on various platforms (e.g., telephone, video calls, and through texts) and locations (e.g. home, car), offered connection and community support, and addressed barriers to the use of supervised consumption sites (e.g., location, stigma, confidentiality, safety, availability, COVID-19 related closures). Spotting calls often began with setting an overdose response plan (i.e., when and who to call). Many participants noted that, due to the criminalization of drug use and fear of arrest, they preferred that roommates/friends/family members be called instead of emergency services in case of an overdose. Both spotters and spottees raised concerns about the timeliness of overdose response, particularly in remote and rural settings. CONCLUSION: Spotting is a novel addition to, but not replacement for, existing harm reduction services. To optimize overdose/COVID-19/STBBI's prevention services, additional supports (e.g., changes to Good Samaritan Laws) are needed. The criminalization of drug use may limit uptake of formal spotting services.

Practices of care among people who buy, use, and sell drugs in community settings.

BACKGROUND: Popular perception of people who sell drugs is negative, with drug selling framed as predatory and morally reprehensible. In contrast, people who use drugs (PWUD) often describe positive perceptions of the people who sell them drugs. The "Satellite Sites" program in Toronto, Canada, provides harm reduction services in the community spaces where people gather to buy, use, and sell drugs. This program hires PWUD-who may move into and out of drug selling-as harm reduction workers. In this paper, we examine the integration of people who sell drugs directly into harm reduction service provision, and their practices of care with other PWUD in their community. METHODS: Data collection included participant observation within the Satellite Sites over a 7-month period in 2016-2017, complemented by 20 semi-structured interviews with Satellite Site workers, clients, and program supervisors. Thematic analysis was used to examine practices of care emerging from the activities of Satellite Site workers, including those circulating around drug selling and sharing behaviors. RESULTS: Satellite Site workers engage in a variety of practices of care with PWUD accessing their sites. Distribution of harm reduction equipment is more easily visible as a practice of care because it conforms to normative framings of care. Criminalization, coupled with negative framings of drug selling as predatory, contributes to the difficultly in examining acts of mutual aid and care that surround drug selling as practices of care. By taking seriously the importance for PWUD of procuring good quality drugs, a wider variety of practices of care are made visible. These additional practices of care include assistance in buying drugs, information on drug potency, and refusal to sell drugs that are perceived to be too strong. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest a potential for harm reduction programs to incorporate some people who sell drugs into programming. Taking practices of care seriously may remove some barriers to integration of people who sell drugs into harm reduction programming, and assist in the development of more pertinent interventions that understand the key role of drug buying and selling within the lives of PWUD.

What Can we Learn from the English-Language Media Coverage of Cannabis Legalization in Canada?

Background: In October 2018, Canada became the second country in the world to legalize cannabis. However, at this stage in the implementation process, it can be challenging to get a sense of the outcomes of this policy shift - hence why we turned to media. Purpose/objectives: We present the results of a qualitative content analysis conducted on the media coverage between October 2018 and April 2019. Methods: We used Google News and ProQuest database to complete our search. We included online media articles published between October 2018 and April 2019 in English. This left us with 81 eligible articles. These articles were analyzed by blending deductive and inductive approaches. Results: The articles were grouped into 5 categories: 1) housing, 2) access, 3) workplace, 4) driving, and 5) public consumption. Each category was then analyzed to identify emerging themes across news stories. Overall, we found that non-governmental actors such as landlords and employers were given a great deal of flexibility to introduce overly broad and restrictive regulations that disproportionately impact various communities. We also found that emphasis was placed on banning cannabis in various spheres of life as opposed to adapting to the new reality that cannabis is now legal. Conclusion: Real-time observations are critically needed to better understand the impact of policy implementation across the three levels of government: federal, provincial and territorial, and municipal. Our findings suggest that media coverage analysis can help us understand and track issues as they arise.

Challenges, Skepticism, and Recommendations from Police about Working in Collaboration with Supervised Consumption Services.

BACKGROUND: The operation of supervised consumption services (SCS), programs that offer supervised locations for the consumption of drugs such as heroin, other opioids, cocaine, other stimulants, and other drugs, is contingent on cooperative relationships with police. In this manuscript, we focus on an under studied topic: how active duty police officers understand their role with respect to SCS, and their recommendations for improving relationships with these programs. Methods: During 2018, we audio-recorded and transcribed focus group discussions conducted in four police divisions with 26 police constables and 3 officers of other ranks in Toronto, Canada. Officers were asked about their roles relative to SCS, perceived training needs, and how to build cooperative relationships with SCS. We followed an iterative thematic approach to analyze the data. Results: Participants in three divisions were unclear about their roles, duties, and policy governing policing of SCS. Participants in the fourth division had received instructions from the division commander to observe a "distance and discretion policy". However, these participants believed that developing familiarity with the new SCS, instead of keeping a distance, would be a more effective approach to building working relationships with staff, clients, and the local community. There was nearly unanimous skepticism about the willingness of SCS workers to work cooperatively with the police. These perceptions were commonly linked to previous negative experiences with harm reduction workers and, in some cases, staff at the new SCS. Several participants also linked problems in communication to fundamental differences between the philosophies or worldviews of SCS staff versus those of police. Conclusions: Building collaborative SIS-police relationships can be assisted by demystifying the operation of SCS for police, articulating policies, and working toward mutual respect.

Using concept mapping to inform the development of a transitional reintegration intervention program for formerly incarcerated people with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Accessing HIV-related care is challenging for formerly incarcerated people with HIV. Interventions informed by the perspectives of these individuals could facilitate engagement with care and address competing priorities that may act as barriers to this process. METHODS: We used concept mapping to identify and prioritize the main obstacles to engaging with HIV-related care following prison release. In brainstorming sessions, formerly incarcerated people with HIV generated responses to a focused prompt regarding the main barriers to reengaging with care. These were consolidated in 35 statements. Next, participants sorted the consolidated list of responses into groups and rated each from lowest to highest in terms of its importance and feasibility of being addressed. We used cluster analysis to generate concept maps that were interpreted with participants. RESULTS: Overall, 39 participants participated in brainstorming sessions, among whom 18 returned for rating and sorting. Following analysis, a seven-cluster map was generated, with participants rating the 'Practical Considerations' (e.g. lack of transportation from prison) and 'Survival Needs' (e.g. securing housing and food) clusters as most important. Although ratings were generally similar between women and men, women assigned greater importance to barriers related to reconnecting with children. CONCLUSIONS: Using concept mapping, we worked with formerly incarcerated people with HIV to identify and prioritize key challenges related to accessing health and social services following prison release. Transitional intervention programs should include programs and processes that address meeting basic subsistence needs and overcoming logistical barriers related to community re-entry.

Implementation contexts and the impact of policing on access to supervised consumption services in Toronto, Canada: a qualitative comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Supervised consumption services (SCS) are being implemented across Canada in response to a variety of drug-related harms. We explored the implementation context of newly established SCS in Toronto and the role of policing in shaping program access by people who inject drugs (PWID). METHODS: We conducted one-to-one qualitative semi-structured interviews with 24 PWID. Participants were purposively recruited. Ethnographic observations were conducted at each of the study sites as well as in their respective neighbourhoods. Relevant policy documents were also reviewed. RESULTS: Policing was overwhelmingly discussed by participants from both SCS sites. However, participant responses varied depending on the site in question. Subthemes from participant responses on policing at site #1 described neighbourhood police presence and fears of police harassment and drug arrests before, during, or after accessing SCS. Conversely, subthemes from participant responses on policing at site #2 described immunity and protection from police while using the SCS, as well as a lack of police presence or fears of police harassment and arrests. These differences in implementation contexts were largely shaped by differences in local neighbourhoods and drug scenes. Police policies highlighted federal laws protecting PWID within SCS, but also the exercise of discretion when applying the rule of law outside of these settings. CONCLUSIONS: Participants' perspectives on, and experiences with, policing as they relate to accessing SCS were shaped by the implementation contexts of each SCS site and how neighbourhoods, drug scenes, and differences in policing practices affected service use. Our findings also demonstrate the disconnect between the goals of policing and those of SCS. Until larger structural barriers are addressed (e.g. criminalization), future SCS programming should consider the impact of policing on the SCS implementation context to improve client experience with, and access to, SCS.

"Maybe if I stop the drugs, then maybe they'd care?"-hospital care experiences of people who use drugs.

BACKGROUND: Drug use is associated with increased morbidity and mortality but people who use drugs experience significant barriers to care. Data are needed about the care experiences of people who use drugs to inform interventions and quality improvement initiatives. The objective of this study is to describe and characterize the experience of acute care for people who use drugs. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study. We recruited people with a history of active drug use at the time of an admission to an acute care hospital, who were living with HIV or hepatitis C, in Toronto and Ottawa, Canada. Data were collected in 2014 and 2015 through semi-structured interviews, audio-recorded and transcribed, and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Twenty-four adults (18 men, 6 women) participated. Participants predominantly recounted experiences of stigma and challenges accessing care. We present the identified themes in two overarching domains of interest: perceived effect of drug use on hospital care and impact of care experiences on future healthcare interactions. Participants described significant barriers to pain management, often resulting in inconsistent and inadequate pain management. They described various strategies to navigate access and receipt of healthcare from being "an easy patient" to self-advocacy. Negative experiences influenced their willingness to seek care, often resulting in delayed care seeking and targeting of certain hospitals. CONCLUSION: Drug use was experienced as a barrier at all stages of hospital care. Interventions to decrease stigma and improve our consistency and approach to pain management are necessary to improve the quality of care and care experiences of those who use drugs.

Factors Associated with Frequency of Recent Initiation of Others into Injection Drug Use Among People Who Inject Drugs in Los Angeles and San Francisco, CA, USA, 2016-17.

Objective: Drug injection initiation is often assisted by a person who injects drugs (PWID). How often PWID provide this assistance has not been examined. We examine frequency of injection initiation assistance and factors associated with high (4+) and low frequency (1-3) initiation assistance as compared to no initiation assistance among PWID. Methods: Participants were 979 Californian PWID. PWID were interviewed about providing injection initiation assistance in the last 6 months among other items. Multinomial regression analysis was used to examine factors associated with levels of frequency of injection initiation assistance. Results: Among participants, 132 (14%) had initiated 784 people into injection (mean = 5.94 [standard deviation = 20.13]; median = 2, interquartile range = 1,4) in the last 6 months. PWID engaged in high frequency initiation (26% of sample) assisted 662 new initiates (84% of total). Using multinomial regression analysis with no initiating as the referent group, we found that high frequency initiating was statistically associated with higher injection frequency, having a paying sex partner, taking someone to a shooting gallery, and providing injection assistance. Lower frequency initiation was statistically associated with having a paying sex partner, illegal income source, and providing injection assistance. Conclusion: Differences between high and low frequency initiators were not found. Sex work and assisting with drug injection were linked to initiating others. Individual-level interventions that reduce this behavior among PWID and structural interventions such as safe consumption sites and opioid medication treatments that interrupt the social process of injection initiation should be considered as ways to reduce injection initiations.