Opioid Use Among Those Who Have Criminal Justice Experience: Harm Reduction Strategies to Lessen HIV Risk.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We reviewed the HIV and opioid literature relevant to harm reduction strategies for those with criminal justice experience. RECENT FINDINGS: Opioid use in the United States has risen at an alarming rate recently. This has led to increased numbers of people who inject drugs, placing new populations at risk for HIV, including those who have criminal justice experience. In recent years, there has been a gradual decrease in the number of individuals under the supervision of the criminal justice system. However, concurrently, there has been a rise in the number of individuals incarcerated in jails in rural counties that are at the center of the current opioid epidemic. We provide a number of harm reduction strategies that could be implemented in correctional settings such as access and linkage to medication-assisted treatment, connection to syringe exchange programs and safe injection facilities (where available), and the repackaging of pre-exposure prophylaxis as a harm reduction tool.

Public Health and Solitary Confinement in the United States.

The history of solitary confinement in the United States stretches from the silent prisons of 200 years ago to today's supermax prisons, mechanized panopticons that isolate tens of thousands, sometimes for decades. We examined the living conditions and characteristics of the populations in solitary confinement. As part of the growing movement for reform, public health agencies have an ethical obligation to help address the excessive use of solitary confinement in jails and prisons in accordance with established public health functions (e.g., violence prevention, health equity, surveillance, and minimizing of occupational and psychological hazards for correctional staff). Public health professionals should lead efforts to replace reliance on this overly punitive correctional policy with models based on rehabilitation and restorative justice.

Adolescent substance use and other illegal behaviors and racial disparities in criminal justice system involvement: findings from a US national survey.

We used data from a national survey to examine arrest rate disparities between African American and White adolescents (aged 12-17 years; n=6725) in relation to drug-related and other illegal behaviors. African American adolescents were less likely than Whites to have engaged in drug use or drug selling, but were more likely to have been arrested. Racial disparities in adolescent arrest appear to result from differential treatment of minority youths and to have long-term negative effects on the lives of affected African American youths.

Bringing health care advocacy to a public defender's office.

Recent arrestees often face barriers to health care access as they move through the judicial process, placing them at significant health risk. The immediate postrelease period generally involves numerous court dates, meetings, and other obligations that can fragment the delivery of care. A residency training program collaborated with public defenders to facilitate medical screenings and referrals for recent arrestees in Bronx County, New York. From May 2005 to June 2007, a medical resident met with 104 arrestees at the public defenders' office to take medical histories, make medical referrals, and make appointments at a primary care clinic. Arrestees' kept-appointment rate at the clinic (66%) exceeded the clinic's overall 2006-2007 kept-appointment rate for first appointments (50%). Collaboration between public defenders and physicians can facilitate arrestees' access to health care.

On drug treatment and social control: Russian narcology's great leap backwards.

The medical discipline of narcology in Russia is a subspecialty of psychiatry from the Soviet era and it is given warrant to define the scope of health activities with regard to alcohol and other drug use, drug users, and related problems. Narcological practice is in turn constrained by the State. The emergence of widespread injection opiate use and associated HIV morbidities and mortalities during the first decade following the collapse of the Soviet Union has brought the contradictions in Russian narcological discourse into high relief. Narcology officials in the Russian Federation have consistently opposed substitution treatment for opiate dependence--the replacement of a short-acting illegal substance with a longer acting prescribed drug with similar pharmacological action but lower degree of risk. Thus, despite the addition of methadone and buprenorphine to WHO's list of essential medicines in 2005 and multiple position papers by international experts calling for substitution treatment as a critical element in the response to HIV (IOM, 2006; UNODC, UNAIDS, and WHO, 2005), methadone or buprenorphine remain prohibited by law in Russia. The authors detail Russian opposition to the prescription of methadone and buprenorphine, describing four phenomena: (1) the dominance of law enforcement and drug control policy over public health and medical ethics; (2) the conflation of Soviet era alcoholism treatment with treatment for opiate dependence; (3) the near universal representation of detoxification from drugs as treatment for dependence; and (4) a framework for judging treatment efficacy that is restricted to "cure" versus "failure to cure," and does not admit its poor outcomes or recognize alternative frameworks for gauging treatment of opiate dependence. In keeping with this position, Russian narcology officials have taken an implacable ideological stance toward illicit drug use, the people who use drugs, and their treatment. By adopting policies and practices totally unsupported by scientific evidence and inquiry, officials in Russia have rendered narcology (and medical practice) insensitive to the alarming rates and continued spread of HIV, with its dire morbidity and mortality rates in the Russian Federation, turning their backs on all the other health problems posed by opiate use and dependence itself.

Return to Galileo? The Inquisition of the International Narcotic Control Board.

Nearly 400 years after Galileo Galilei of Florence was arraigned and convicted of suspected heresy by the ten member Congregation of the Holy Office (Inquisition), the International Narcotic Control Board (INCB) is similarly inserting itself into matters pertaining to innovations in healthcare and the public health response to addiction throughout the world. Like that earlier Inquisition of 1633 that convicted Galileo of heresy for holding that the sun is the centre of the universe with the earth revolving around it (in contradiction to church doctrine of the time) the INCB and its thirteen-member panel, now rails against any evidence out of sync with the established doctrine of the war on drugs--particularly those innovations in public health called harm reduction. The latest healthcare and harm reduction practices to attract the ire of the INCB Inquisition are elements of Canada's most effective and innovative measures to minimize the harms of drugs in Vancouver--supervised injection facilities and, recently, the potential establishment of supervised inhalation rooms--along with the long established practice of providing safer mouthpieces for pulmonary inhalation in British Columbia. This is particularly significant as it comes in the midst of a crucial battle between municipal and provincial authorities in BC with the federal government in Ottawa, which seems determined to undermine all the most effective HR programs that are the result of years of steady local and governmental support in Vancouver and now threatens to derail all these programs and spread doubt about their usefulness despite the overwhelmingly positive findings of serous research.

Years of life lost to prison: racial and gender gradients in the United States of America.

BACKGROUND: The United States has the highest rate of imprisonment of any country in the world. African Americans and Hispanics comprise a disproportionately large share of the prison population. We applied a "prison life expectancy" to specify differences in exposure to imprisonment by gender and race at the population level. METHODS: The impact of imprisonment on life expectancy in the United States was measured for each year from 2000 to 2004, and then averaged. Using the Sullivan method, prison and prison-free life expectancies were estimated by dividing the years lived in each age range of the life table into these two states using prevalence of imprisonment by gender and race. RESULTS: African American males can expect to spend on average 3.09 years in prison or jail over their lifetime and Hispanic and Caucasian males can spend on average 1.06 and 0.50 years, respectively. African American females, on the other hand, can expect to spend on average 0.23 years in these institutions and Hispanic and Caucasian females can expect to spend on average 0.09 and 0.05 years, respectively. Overall, African American males, the highest risk group, can expect to spend on average 61.80 times longer in prison or jail as compared to Caucasian women, the lowest risk group. CONCLUSION: There are clear gender and racial gradients in life expectancy spent in prison in the United States. Future research needs to examine how current imprisonment practice in the United States may influence population health and health disparities.

A paradoxical peace: HIV in post-conflict states.

Conflict has traditionally been thought to contribute to the epidemic spread of HIV. New data call into question this assumption, and there is concern that the 'post-conflict phase' may be a particularly dangerous time for HIV transmission. The post-conflict phase is characterized by a potentially disastrous confluence of factors including demobilization of combatants, the presence of peacekeeping forces, the return of potentially infected soldiers and refugees, high-risk behaviours and persistent economic and social debilitation. These factors, along with the concentration of populations into cities and urban areas, may further increase the risk to these populations of HIV infection. Further research and study are required to adequately inform and address the issue of HIV transmission in post-conflict societies.

Closed to reason: time for accountability for the International Narcotic Control Board.

For more than two decades, the International Narcotic Control Board (INCB) has tried to stop harm reduction and its HIV prevention programs. This posture is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of their responsibilities and of drug addiction itself--i.e. as a public health and clinical care matter made criminal by decree. A recent focal point for the Board's action has been rejecting the use of supervised injection facilities to reduce morbidity and mortality of drug injectors. They single out individual countries and attempt to bully them into rejecting such programs under the banner of the United Nations (falsely) and in the name of international treaties. Their unrelenting and unjustified badgering of signatories to the international treaties that established the INCB is not only unjustified; it is an affront to one of the core purposes of the Board itself: to ensure adequate medical supplies and safe use of controlled substances. The INCB's ill-conceived obsession with intravenous addiction as a crime flies in the face of the medical view and policies of the World Health Organization and the universally endorsed principles of the General Assembly of the United Nations. The latest target of the INCB is North America's only supervised injection facility, Insite, located in the inner city of Vancouver, Canada. Using the power of their office to meddle in matters of public health for individual nations is without medical, scientific or legal justification. But, most importantly, it is a matter of life and death for these most marginalized of citizens. The empirical evidence remains that a significant portion of the continued growth of the AIDS pandemic is due to injecting drug use, and the INCB's intrusion will inevitably result in additional deaths due to preventable HIV infections and drug overdoses. So we are very pleased to call to our readers' attention to a recent report produced by the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network and the International Harm Reduction Development Program (IHRD) joined by former United Nations Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, the respected Canadian statesman Stephen Lewis. The full report, "Closed to Reason: The International Narcotics Control Board and HIV/AIDS" is attached along [see Additional file 1] with a Russian translation of the key findings of the authors [see Additional files 2] as well as Russian and Chinese translations of this abstract [see Additional 3 and 4]. As the report makes very clear, the time to inject some accountability and reason into the INCB is now.

Potential for HIV transmission through unsafe injections.

We tested for HIV in discarded needles and syringe washes from 191 HIV-infected patients receiving injections in rural Cameroon. HIV-1 RNA was amplified from 34 of 103 intravenous injection syringes and two of 88 intramuscular injection syringes. All 36 strains were HIV-1 group M. The majority belonged to the circulating recombinant form CRF02 (IbNg). Our data support a role for unsafe injections in the spread of HIV-1 in Africa, in contrast to recent studies.

Insite: Canada's landmark safe injecting program at risk.

InSite is North Americas first supervised injection site and a landmark public heath initiative operating in Vancouver since 2003. The program is a vital component of that cities internationally recognized harm reduction approach to its serious problems with drugs, crime, homelessness and AIDS. InSite currently operates under a waiver of Federal rules that allow it to provide services as a research project. An extensive evaluation has produced very positive results for thousands of users. Normally such strong evidence documenting the successes of such a program, and the medical and public health significance of these positive outcomes, would be the basis for celebration and moves to expand the model and provide similar services elsewhere in Canada. Instead, there is a distinct possibility that InSite will be closed by the newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Paul Harper--a conservative who has traveled to the US to visit George WQ Bush and come back antagonistic to harm reduction in all its forms. Because InSites federal waiver is expiring and up for renewal in September, the fear is that Mr. Harpers will not renew the approval and that the program will be forced to close down. The risks associated with the potential closure of InSite need to be fully understood. This editorial lays out these public health risks and the associated economic impact if InSite were to be closed. In addition to preventable deaths and disease, InSites closure will cost Vancouver and British Columbia between $3.8 and $8.8 million in preventable health care expenses over the next two years.

Policy makers ignoring science and scientists ignoring policy: the medical ethical challenges of heroin treatment.

A decade of research in Switzerland, The Netherlands, Germany, and Spain now constitutes a massive body of work supporting the use of heroin treatment for the most difficult patients addicted to opiates. These trials concur on this method's safety and efficacy and are now serving as a prelude to the institution of heroin treatment in clinical practice throughout Europe. While the different sampling and research protocols for heroin treatment in these studies were important to the academic claims about specific results and conclusions that could be drawn from each study, the overall outcomes were quite clear--and uniformly positive. They all find that the use of prescribed pharmaceutical heroin does exactly what it is intended to do: it reaches a treatment refractory group of addicts by engaging them in a positive healthcare relationship with a physician, it reduces their criminal activity, improves their health status, and increases their social tenure through more stable housing, employment, and contact with family. The Canadian trial (NAOMI), now underway for over a year, but not yet completed, now faces a dilemma about what to do with its patients who have successfully completed 12 months of heroin and must be withdrawn from heroin and transferred to other treatments in accordance with the research protocol approved by Government of Canada, federal granting body and host institutions. The problem is that the principal criterion for acceptance to NAOMI was their history of repeated failure in these very same treatment programs to which they will now be referred. The existence of the results from abroad (some of which were not yet available when NAOMI was designed and initiated) now raises a very important question for Canada: is it ethical to continue to prohibit the medical use of heroin treatment that has already been shown to be feasible and effective in numerous medical studies throughout the world? And while this is being worked out, is it acceptable to require patients who have been successfully treated with heroin in Canada, to be forced to move back to less effective treatments (treatments that failed to be efficacious in the past)? This essay discusses this dilemma and places it in the broader context of ethics, science, and health policy. It makes the case for continuation of the current successful patients in heroin treatment and the institution of heroin treatment to all Canadian patients living with active addictions who qualify.

The case of Scott Ortiz: a clash between criminal justice and public health.

The criminal justice system creates particular challenges for persons with HIV and Hepatitis C, many of whom have a history of injection drug use. The case of Scott Ortiz, taken from public trial and sentencing transcripts, reveals the manner in which incarceration may delay learning of important health problems such as Hepatitis C infection. In addition, the case of Mr. Ortiz suggests the bias in sentencing that a former injection drug user may face. Collaboration between the Montefiore Medical Center residency in Social Medicine and a Bronx legal services agency, Bronx Defenders, yielded the discovery that a decade after diagnosis with HIV and after long term incarceration, Mr. Ortiz was infected with Hepatitis C. Mr. Ortiz only became aware of his advanced Hepatitis C and liver damage during his trial. The second important aspect of this case centers on the justification for lengthy sentence for a burglary conviction. The presiding Judge in Mr. Ortiz's case acknowledged that because of his advanced illness, Mr. Ortiz posed no threat to society as a burglar (the crime for which he was convicted). But the Judge elected to use his discretion to sentence Mr. Ortiz to a term of 15 years to life (as opposed to a minimum of two to four years) based on the idea that the public health would be served by preventing Mr. Ortiz from returning to the life of a street addict, sharing dirty needles with others. Mr. Ortiz reports distant injection drug use, no evidence of current or recent drug use was presented during Mr. Ortiz's trial and he reports no injection drug use for over a decade. In this case, bias against a former injection drug user, masquerading as concern for public health, is used to justify a lengthier sentence. Mr. Ortiz's lack of awareness of his Hepatitis C infection despite long term incarceration, combined with the justification for his dramatically increased sentence, provide examples of how persons within the criminal justice system may face particular challenges to their health.

Treating Addictions: Harm Reduction in Clinical Care and Prevention.

This paper examines the role of clinical practitioners and clinical researchers internationally in establishing the utility of harm-reduction approaches to substance use. It thus illustrates the potential for clinicians to play a pivotal role in health promoting structural interventions based on harm-reduction goals and public health models. Popular media images of drug use as uniformly damaging, and abstinence as the only acceptable goal of treatment, threaten to distort clinical care away from a basis in evidence, which shows that some ways of using drugs are far more harmful than others and that punitive approaches and insistence on total abstinence as the only goal of treatment often increases the harms of drug use rather than reducing drug use. Therefore the leadership and scientific authority of clinicians who understand the health impact of harm-reduction strategies is needed. Through a review of harm-reduction interventions in Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, Switzerland, and the Netherlands, we identify three ways that clinicians have helped to achieve a paradigm shift from punitive approaches to harm-reduction principles in clinical care and in drug policy: (1) through clinical research to provide data establishing the effectiveness and feasibility of harm-reduction approaches, (2) by developing innovative clinical programmes that employ harm reduction, and thereby (3) changing the standard of care to include routine use of these evidence-based (but often misunderstood) approaches in their practices. We argue that through promotion of harm-reduction goals and methods, clinicians have unique opportunities to improve the health outcomes of vulnerable populations.

Witch-hunt.

Beginning two years ago, the US Dept of Health and Human Services began "special reviews" of all current research grants that involved harm reduction, sex and drugs, and continues its ban on funding of needle exchange. With Bush's second term, the campaign was extended to all US funded international programs that dealt with these issues and populations. And, most recently, the US has again undertaken to dominate the discourse within international organizations charged with drug control and AIDS policies - especially those of the UN. But the international harm reduction and human rights community is fighting back in several important ways, including "An Open Letter to the delegates of the Forty-eighth session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) of the UN" prepared by a group of 334 well respected public health experts and human rights advocates, protesting U.S. pressure on the U.N. to withdraw its support from harm reduction. This editorial includes the letter and signatures as well as French, Spanish, and Russian versions of the letter as additional files.