RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The United States (US) continues to face decades-long increases in opioid overdose fatalities. As an opioid overdose reversal medication, naloxone can dramatically reduce opioid overdose mortality rates when distributed to people likely to experience or witness an opioid overdose and packaged with education on its use, known as overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND). Syringe services programs (SSPs) are ideal venues for OEND with staff who are culturally competent in providing services for people who are at risk of experiencing or observing an opioid overdose. We carried out a randomized controlled trial of SSPs to understand the effectiveness of the organize and mobilize for implementation effectiveness (OMIE) approach at improving OEND implementation effectiveness within SSPs. METHODS: Using simple randomization, 105 SSPs were enrolled into the trial and assigned to one of two study arms - (1) dissemination of OEND best practice recommendations (Control SSPs) or the OMIE approach along with dissemination of the OEND best practice recommendations (i.e., OMIE SSPs). OMIE SSPs could participate in 60-min OMIE sessions once a month for up to 12 months. At 12-month post-baseline, 102 of 105 SSPs (97%) responded to the follow-up survey. RESULTS: The median number of sessions completed by OMIE SSPs was 10. Comparing OMIE SSPs to control SSPs, we observed significant increases in the number of participants receiving naloxone (incidence rate ratio: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.42, 3.25; p < 0.01) and the rate of naloxone doses distributed per SSP participant (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.18, 3.30; p = 0.01). We observed no statistically significant difference in the number of adopted best practices between conditions (difference in means 0.2, 95% CI: - 0.7, 1.0; p = 0.68). We also observed a threshold effect where SSPs receiving a higher OMIE dose had greater effect sizes with regard to the number of people given naloxone and the number of naloxone doses distributed. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the multifaceted OMIE approach was effective at increasing naloxone distribution from SSPs, despite substantial external shocks during the trial. These findings have major implications for addressing the overdose crisis, which has continued unabated for decades. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03924505 . Registered 19 April 2019.
Assuntos
Overdose de Drogas , Overdose de Opiáceos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Naloxona/uso terapêutico , Overdose de Opiáceos/tratamento farmacológico , Overdose de Drogas/tratamento farmacológico , Overdose de Drogas/prevenção & controle , Educação em Saúde , United States Department of Veterans Affairs , Antagonistas de Entorpecentes/uso terapêutico , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Given the attention, funding, and services that seek to reduce overdose mortality from fentanyl, it is important to understand whether a potential solution is for more people to switch from injecting to smoking fentanyl. As such, we set out to conduct a study to compare health and healthcare utilization outcomes associated with different modes of illicit fentanyl administration. METHODS: From January to February 2023, we recruited people who use drugs from 34 syringe services programs across California, USA (N=999) and surveyed their substance use, health outcomes, and healthcare utilization. We compared health risks among people who injected fentanyl (78% of whom also smoked) to people who solely smoked fentanyl (n=563). RESULTS: Of the 563 participants, forty-one percent injected fentanyl and 59% only smoked fentanyl. People who injected fentanyl were 40% more likely to have experienced a non-fatal overdose in the past 3 months (27% vs. 19%; aRR=1.40; 95% CI=1.03, 1.93) and 253% more likely to have had a skin and soft tissue infection in the past 3 months (39% vs. 15%; aRR=2.53; 95% CI=1.74, 3.67), compared to people who only smoked fentanyl. The average number of nights spent in the hospital was higher among people who injected fentanyl (average 1.2 nights vs. 0.7 nights; aIRR=1.78; 95% CI=1.02, 3.09; p=0.04).There were non-significant associations between mode of fentanyl administration and number of emergency department visits and probability of hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggested that people who injected fentanyl were at higher risk for overdose and skin and soft tissue infections than people who only smoked fentanyl. Distribution of safe smoking supplies may facilitate transitions from injecting to smoking fentanyl, thereby reducing health risks associated with fentanyl use.
Assuntos
Overdose de Drogas , Fentanila , Humanos , Fentanila/efeitos adversos , Preparações Farmacêuticas , Overdose de Drogas/epidemiologia , Fumar/epidemiologia , California/epidemiologia , Analgésicos Opioides , Produtos do TabacoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Tenderloin Center (TLC), a multi-service center where people could receive or be connected to basic needs, behavioral health care, housing, and medical services, was open in San Francisco for 46 weeks in 2022. Within a week of operation, services expanded to include an overdose prevention site (OPS), also known as safe consumption site. OPSs have operated internationally for over three decades, but government-sanctioned OPSs have only recently been implemented in the United States. We used ethnographic methods to understand the ways in which a sanctioned OPS, situated in a multi-service center, impacts the lives of people who use drugs (PWUD). METHODS: We conducted participant observation and in-depth interviews June-December 2022. Extensive field notes and 39 in-depth interviews with 24 TLC guests and 15 TLC staff were analyzed using an inductive analysis approach. Interviewees were asked detailed questions about their experiences using and working at the TLC. RESULTS: TLC guests and staff described an atmosphere where radical hospitality-welcoming guests with extraordinary warmth, generosity, and unconditional acceptance-was central to the culture. We found that the co-location of an OPS within a multi-service agency (1) allowed for the culture of radical hospitality to flourish, (2) yielded a convenient one-stop shop model, (3) created a space for community building, and (4) offered safety and respite to guests. CONCLUSIONS: The co-location of an OPS within a multi-service drop-in center is an important example of how such an organization can build positive sociality among PWUD while protecting autonomy and reducing overdose mortality. Overdose response and reversal is an act of relational accountability in which friends, peers, and even strangers intervene to protect and revive one another. This powerful intervention was operationalized as an anti-oppressive, horizontal activity through radical hospitality with a built environment that allowed PWUD to be both social and safe.
Assuntos
Overdose de Drogas , Humanos , São Francisco , Overdose de Drogas/prevenção & controle , Usuários de Drogas/psicologia , Feminino , Masculino , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/prevenção & controle , Redução do Dano , Entrevistas como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Overdose prevention sites (OPSs) are spaces where individuals can use pre-obtained drugs and trained staff can immediately intervene in the event of an overdose. While some OPSs use a combination of naloxone and oxygen to reverse overdoses, little is known about oxygen as a complementary tool to naloxone in OPS settings. We conducted a mixed methods study to assess the role of oxygen provision at a locally sanctioned OPS in San Francisco, California. METHODS: We used descriptive statistics to quantify number and type of overdose interventions delivered in 46 weeks of OPS operation in 2022. We used qualitative data from OPS staff interviews to evaluate experiences using oxygen during overdose responses. Interviews were coded and thematically analyzed to identify themes related to oxygen impact on overdose response. RESULTS: OPS staff were successful in reversing 100% of overdoses (n = 333) during 46 weeks of operation. Oxygen became available 18 weeks after opening. After oxygen became available (n = 248 overdose incidents), nearly all involved oxygen (91.5%), with more than half involving both oxygen and naloxone (59.3%). Overdoses involving naloxone decreased from 98% to 66%, though average number of overdoses concomitantly increased from 5 to 9 per week. Interviews revealed that oxygen improved overdose response experiences for OPS participants and staff. OPS EMTs were leaders of delivering and refining the overdose response protocol and trained other staff. Challenges included strained relationships with city emergency response systems due to protocol requiring 911 calls after all naloxone administrations, inconsistent supplies, and lack of sufficient staffing causing people to work long shifts. CONCLUSIONS: Although the OPS operated temporarily, it offered important insights. Ensuring consistent oxygen supplies, staffing, and removing 911 call requirements after every naloxone administration could improve resource management. These recommendations may enable success for future OPS in San Francisco and elsewhere.
Assuntos
Overdose de Drogas , Humanos , São Francisco , Overdose de Drogas/prevenção & controle , Overdose de Drogas/tratamento farmacológico , Naloxona/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Entorpecentes/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Groin and neck injections are generally a last resort for people who inject drugs (PWID) who do not have easy access to functioning veins. These alternative injection practices can lead to an increased likelihood of adverse health outcomes. There is still much we do not know about groin and neck injections among PWID in the US, as the literature to-date comes from studies primarily focused on groin injections outside the US. We assessed prevalence, predictors, and associated behaviors of neck injection through a survey fielded in San Francisco, California, US. METHODS: The sample comes from a longitudinal observational study that used targeted sampling to recruit PWID in San Francisco. The current study sample includes 239 PWID who completed their 12-month survey between June 2019 and June 2020. RESULTS: About a third of the sample reported injecting in their neck in the past 30 days, with the most common reason being lack of available veins. Age, past 6-month abscess / soft tissue infection, and past 30-day use of opioids mixed with cocaine were significantly associated with past 30-day neck injection in the final multivariate model. Past 30-day neck injection was also significantly associated with being injected by another person in the past 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: PWID at higher risk for vein deterioration were more likely to inject into their neck. Harm reduction strategies such as safer injection counseling, safe smoking supplies, use of "street doctors," and safe consumption sites may reduce instances of neck injection and/or associated health risks.