A Qualitative Analysis of Barriers to Accessing HIV Prevention Services During an HIV Outbreak among Persons who Inject Drugs in West Virginia.

In response to an increase in HIV diagnoses among persons who inject drugs (PWID) in Kanawha County, West Virginia, West Virginia Bureau for Public Health and CDC conducted a qualitative assessment in Kanawha County to inform HIV outbreak response activities. Interviews with 26 PWID and 45 community partners were completed. Transcribed interviews were analyzed to identify barriers to accessing HIV prevention services among PWID using the risk environment framework. Participants identified numerous political, physical, social, and economic community-level barriers that influenced access to HIV prevention services among PWID. Political factors included low community support for syringe services programs (SSPs); physical factors included low SSP coverage, low coverage of HIV testing outreach events, low HIV preexposure prophylaxis availability, and homelessness; social factors included stigma and discrimination; economic factors included community beliefs that SSPs negatively affect economic investments and limited resources for HIV screening in clinical settings. Individual-level barriers included co-occurring acute medical conditions and mental illness. Community-level interventions, such as low-barrier one-stop shop models, are needed to increase access to sterile syringes through comprehensive harm reduction services.

Lessons Learned Implementing Syringe Services Programs at Rural Health Departments in Kentucky.

Until recently, most syringe services programs (SSPs) in the United States operated in metropolitan areas. This study explores how SSP implementers at rural health departments in Kentucky secured support for SSP operations. In late 2020, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 18 people involved with rural SSP implementation in Kentucky. Participants were asked to reflect on their experiences building support for SSP operations among rural health department staff and community members. Participants reported that attitudes and beliefs about SSP implementation among rural health department staff shifted quickly following engagement in educational activities and interaction with SSP clients. Participants explained that successful SSP implementation at rural health departments required sustained educational activities among community members and authorizing authorities. Future work should explore how rural communities may advocate for low-threshold and evidence-based policies that support the provision of harm reduction services.

Opportunities for cancer prevention at syringe services programs: acceptability of HPV self-sampling and vaccination among people who inject drugs.

INTRODUCTION: Despite having a high risk of acquiring sexually transmitted infections, people who inject drugs (PWID) often do not receive recommended HPV screenings due to barriers to healthcare. Guideline-based cervical HPV screening and vaccination can prevent cervical cancer. Low-cost, low-barrier methods for cancer screening and prevention are important for vulnerable communities such as PWID. METHODS: We examined acceptability of HPV self-sampling at a syringe services program (SSP). Participants with a cervix (n = 49) participated in patient education followed by a survey to assess willingness to perform HPV self-sampling versus standard of care. RESULTS: 59% found self-sampling to be acceptable, citing privacy, ease, and quickness. Among those opting for HPV screening delivered by a provider (n = 16), participants cited concerns about adequate sampling (81%) and test accuracy (75%). Notably, only 18% of participants reported complete HPV vaccination. CONCLUSION: Cervical HPV self-sampling was acceptable to PWID. SSP-based efforts to provide preventative health services could place tools for cancer screening into the hands of PWID, a need-to-reach community.

Association of spatial proximity to fixed-site syringe services programs with HCV serostatus and injection equipment sharing practices among people who inject drugs in rural New England, United States.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) disproportionately affects rural communities, where health services are geographically dispersed. It remains unknown whether proximity to a syringe services program (SSP) is associated with HCV infection among rural people who inject drugs (PWID). METHODS: Data are from a cross-sectional sample of adults who reported injecting drugs in the past 30 days recruited from rural counties in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts (2018-2019). We calculated the road network distance between each participant's address and the nearest fixed-site SSP, categorized as ≤ 1 mile, 1-3 miles, 3-10 miles, and > 10 miles. Staff performed HCV antibody tests and a survey assessed past 30-day injection equipment sharing practices: borrowing used syringes, borrowing other used injection equipment, and backloading. Mixed effects modified Poisson regression estimated prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Analyses were also stratified by means of transportation. RESULTS: Among 330 PWID, 25% lived ≤ 1 mile of the nearest SSP, 17% lived 1-3 miles of an SSP, 12% lived 3-10 miles of an SSP, and 46% lived > 10 miles from an SSP. In multivariable models, compared to PWID who lived within 1 mile of an SSP, those who lived 3 to 10 miles away had a higher prevalence of HCV seropositivity (aPR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.06-1.46), borrowing other used injection equipment (aPR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.46), and backloading (aPR: 1.48, 95% CI 1.17-1.88). Similar results were observed for PWID living > 10 miles from an SSP: aPR [HCV]: 1.19, 95% CI 1.01-1.40; aPR [borrowing other used equipment]:1.45, 95% CI 1.29-1.63; and aPR [backloading]: 1.59, 95% CI 1.13-2.24. Associations between living 1 to 3 miles of an SSP and each outcome did not reach statistical significance. When stratified by means of transportation, associations between distance to SSP and each outcome (except borrowing other used injection equipment) were only observed among PWID who traveled by other means (versus traveled by automobile). CONCLUSIONS: Among PWID in rural New England, living farther from a fixed-site SSP was associated with a higher prevalence of HCV seropositivity, borrowing other used injection equipment, and backloading, reinforcing the need to increase SSP accessibility in rural areas. Means of transportation may modify this relationship.

Were Needles Everywhere?: Differing Views on Syringe Waste and Disposal Associated With Needs-Based Syringe Services Programs Among Community Partners and Persons Who Inject Drugs.

BACKGROUND: Community concerns surrounding syringe waste are a common barrier to syringe services program (SSP) implementation. In Kanawha County, West Virginia, community opposition to SSPs resulted in the closure of needs-based SSPs prior to and during an HIV outbreak among persons who inject drugs (PWID). This qualitative analysis examines views of PWID and community partners on syringe waste and disposal associated with needs-based SSPs. METHODS: Qualitative interviews with 26 PWID and 45 community partners (medical and social service providers, law enforcement personnel, policymakers, and religious leaders) were conducted. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Code summaries described participants' views on syringe waste and disposal and needs-based SSPs. RESULTS: Community partners and PWID who favored needs-based SSPs reported that needs-based SSPs had not affected or reduced syringe waste. Conversely, community partners who favored one-to-one exchange models and/or barcoded syringes described needs-based SSPs increasing syringe waste. Community partners often cited pervasive community beliefs that SSPs increased syringe waste, risk of needlesticks, drug use, and crime. Community partners were unsure how to address syringe waste concerns and emphasized that contradictory views on syringe waste posed barriers to discussing and implementing SSPs. CONCLUSIONS: Participants' views on whether syringe waste was associated with needs-based SSPs often aligned with their support or opposition for needs-based SSPs. These differing views resulted in challenges finding common ground to discuss SSP operations amid an HIV outbreak among PWID. SSPs might consider addressing syringe waste concerns by expanding syringe disposal efforts and implementing community engagement and stigma reduction activities.

An Early Implementation Analysis of Syringe Services Programs in Kentucky: Barriers and Facilitators Identified by Program Operators and Local Officials.

Kentucky is one of ten states that require syringe services program (SSP) approval from local officials to operate legally. Public health leaders and local officials participated in semi-structured interviews in 2016 about the barriers and facilitators of SSP adoption and implementation (N = 22). Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and a thematic content analysis was conducted using Nvivo software. Political support, program champions who led education efforts, and access to resources and training facilitated SSP adoption. The most frequently reported barriers to adoption were often rooted in stigma and included the lack of political will to approve SSPs or lack of recognition of the need for a SSP. Requiring approval from local governing authorities could impose significant implementation delays, limits to the range of harm reduction services provided, and threaten harm reduction program sustainability. Removing barriers to the adoption and implementation of harm reduction programs is critical in order to effectively scale up harm reduction services to reduce the risks of infection and fatal overdose.

A mixed-methods analysis of risk-reduction strategies adopted by syringe services program participants and non-syringe services program participants in New York City.

BACKGROUND: Since the emergence of fentanyl in the drug market, syringe services programs (SSPs) have been at the forefront of providing life-saving tools such as naloxone and fentanyl test strips to people who use drugs (PWUD). It is still unclear, however, how the adoption of risk-reduction practices has differed among PWUD in the context of increasing presence of non-pharmaceutical fentanyl in the drug supply. This study aims to assess the adoption of risk-reduction tools (e.g., naloxone) among those engaged with SSP services and those not engaged with SSP services. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study following a convergent parallel design integrating both quantitative and qualitative data. Interviews were conducted with 80 people who used street opioids (i.e., heroin or opioid pills not prescribed), 32 of whom were not engaged in SSP services. Quantitative differences between those engaged and those not engaged in SSPs were assessed using independent samples t tests and Fisher's exact tests. A thematic analytic approach was employed to compare qualitative responses between the two groups. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged in our analysis: (1) Both groups expressed an interest in fentanyl test strips (FTS), but those engaged in SSP services found them to be more accessible; (2) there was greater adoption of and enthusiasm for naloxone among SSP participants; and (3) SSP participants were more likely to have or be interested in having someone check in on them when using alone, but stigma and perceived personal risk of overdose prevented widespread adoption of this practice among all participants. CONCLUSION: SSPs provide a vital function by facilitating naloxone and FTS distribution to participants who often have little control over their exposure to fentanyl. However, stigma and misconceptions regarding drug use are barriers to people adopting risk-reduction practices, particularly among those not engaged with SSPs.

How do contextual factors influence naloxone distribution from syringe service programs in the USA: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone is a medication that can quickly reverse an opioid overdose. Syringe service programs (SSPs) are community-based prevention programs that provide a range of evidence-based interventions in the USA, including naloxone distribution. Attributes of SSPs make them ideal settings for naloxone distribution-they have staff and delivery models that are designed to reach people who use drugs where they are. We assessed which outer and inner setting factors of SSPs were associated with naloxone distribution in the USA. METHODS: We surveyed SSPs in the USA known to the North American Syringe Exchange Network in 2019. Using the exploration, preparation, implementation and maintenance framework, we assessed inner and outer contextual factors associated with naloxone distribution among SSPs (n = 263 or 77% of SSPs). We utilized negative binomial regression to assess which factors were associated with the number of naloxone doses distributed and people receiving naloxone. RESULTS: SSPs reported distributing 710,232 naloxone doses to 230,506 people in the prior year. Regarding outer setting, SSPs located in areas with high levels of community support had a higher level of naloxone distribution (aIRR = 3.07; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.09-4.51; p < 0.001) and 110% (p = 0.022) higher rate of people receiving naloxone (aIRR = 2.10; 95% CI 1.46-3.02; p < 0.001) in the past 12 months. The legal status of SSPs and the level of need was not significantly associated with naloxone distribution. Regarding inner setting, SSPs with proactive refill systems (aIRR = 2.08; 95% CI 1.27-3.41; p = 0.004), greater number of distribution days (aIRR = 1.09 per day; 95% CI 1.06-1.11; p < 0.001) and older programs (aIRR = 1.06 per year; 95% CI 1.02-1.11; p = 0.004) were associated with higher levels of naloxone distribution. Also, SSPs with proactive refill systems (aIRR = 2.23; 95% CI 1.38-3.58; p = 0.001); greater number of distribution days (aIRR = 1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.07; p < 0.001) and older programs (aIRR = 1.11; 95% CI 1.05-1.17; p < 0.001) were associated with a higher number of people receiving naloxone. CONCLUSION: We identified outer and inner setting factors of SSPs that were associated with greater naloxone distribution. It is critical to ensure SSPs are adequately resourced to build community support for services and develop service delivery models that maximize naloxone distribution to address the nation's opioid overdose crisis.

Housing-based syringe services programs to improve access to safer injecting equipment for people who inject drugs in Vancouver, Canada: a spatially oriented qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Housing environments shape injection drug-related risks and harms and thus represent a critical implementation setting for syringe services programs (SSPs). As critical harm reduction measures, SSPs provide safe injecting equipment to people who inject drugs (PWID). Vancouver, Canada, has well-established syringe distribution programs through which PWID have low-threshold access to unlimited syringes and related injecting equipment, including through non-profit operated supportive housing and single-room occupancy hotels. This study examines the role of housing-based SSPs in distributing injecting equipment to PWID in Vancouver. METHODS: Between January and March 2020, semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted in Vancouver with 26 PWID. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded. Salient themes were identified using inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: Many participants accessed SSPs in housing facilities and expressed preference for these programs over those offered at other locations and through other health and social services. Three major themes emerged to explain this preference. First, most participants injected in the buildings where they resided, and housing-based SSPs made injecting equipment available when and where it was most needed. Second, many participants preferred to avoid carrying syringes outside of the places where they inject due to fears that syringe possession may lead to criminal charges or confiscation of syringes and/or illicit drugs by police. Third, for some participants, anti-drug user stigma and concerns over unwillingly disclosing their drug use hindered access to SSPs outside of housing settings. Programs operated within housing facilities often offered greater client anonymity along with more supportive and less stigmatizing environments, particularly in the presence of peer staff. CONCLUSION: The current study advances understanding of access to injecting equipment in a setting with city-wide syringe distribution programs. Our findings underscore the benefits of housing-based SSPs and encourage the expansion of such services to maximize access to harm reduction supports for PWID.

Availability of telehealth-based services at syringe services programs under the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency.

INTRODUCTION: The expanded capacity of syringe services programs (SSPs) in the USA to integrate telehealth services was largely related to flexibility of buprenorphine prescription in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. SSPs demonstrated the potential of using telehealth to reach participants with both medical and non-medical services. The present study examines the implementation of medical and non-medical telehealth-based health services in 2020 at SSPs in the USA and organizational characteristics associated with adopting specific telehealth services. METHODS: We administered a cross-sectional survey among all known SSPs operating in the USA as of 2021. The two primary study outcomes were (1) implementation of medical telehealth and (2) implementation of non-medical telehealth in 2020. Medical services included HIV counseling/care, hepatitis C virus (HCV) counseling/care, and buprenorphine. Non-medical services included wellbeing/check-ins, overdose prevention training, health navigation, harm reduction and psychological counseling. Bivariate and multivariable mixed effects logistic regression models were used to directly estimate the odds ratio associated with organizational characteristics on the implementation of telehealth-based health services. RESULTS: Thirty percent of programs (n = 290) reported implementing telehealth-based health services. In multivariable logistic regression models, community-based organization SSPs had higher odds of implementing medical (aOR = 4.69, 95% CI [1.96, 11.19]) and non-medical (aOR = 2.18, 95% CI [1.10, 4.31]) health services compared to public health department SSPs. SSPs that received governmental funding had higher odds of implementing medical services via telehealth (aOR = 2.45, 95% CI [1.35, 4.47]) compared to programs without governmental funding. CONCLUSION: Community-based organization SSPs and those with government funding had the highest odds of telehealth implementation in response to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency. Federal, state, and local governments must increase funding for low-barrier venues like SSPs to support telehealth implementation to serve the needs of people who use drugs.

Program Adaptations to Provide Harm Reduction Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study of Syringe Services Programs in the U.S.

Syringe services programs (SSPs) are essential to preventing injection drug use-related infections and overdose death among people who use drugs (PWUD). The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic initially impeded SSPs' operations. To effectively support these programs, information is needed regarding SSPs' experiences adapting their services and the challenges posed by COVID-19. We conducted qualitative interviews with leadership and staff from a sample of 31 U.S. SSPs. Respondents discussed urgent concerns including reduced reach of services, suspended HIV/hepatitis C testing, high COVID-19 risk among PWUD, and negative impacts of isolation on overdose and mental health. They also noted opportunities to improve future services for PWUD, including shifting to evidence-based distribution practices and maintaining regulatory changes that increased access to opioid use disorder medications post-pandemic. Findings can inform efforts to support SSPs in restoring and expanding services, and provide insight into SSPs' role in engaging PWUD during the COVID-19 response and future emergencies.

RESUMEN: Los programas de servicios de jeringas (reconocido como SSP en inglés) son esenciales para prevenir las infecciones relacionadas con el consumo de drogas inyectables y la muerte por sobredosis entre las personas que consumen drogas (reconocidos como PWUD en ingles). La nueva pandemia del coronavirus (COVID-19) inicialmente impidió las operaciones de los SSP. Para apoyar eficazmente estos programas, se necesita información sobre las experiencias de los SSP que adaptan sus servicios y los desafíos que plantea COVID-19. Realizamos entrevistas cualitativas con el liderazgo y el personal de una muestra de 31 SSPs de EE.UU. Los encuestados discutieron las preocupaciones urgentes, incluyendo la reducción del alcance de los servicios, la suspensión de las pruebas de VIH/hepatitis C, el alto riesgo de COVID-19 entre la PWUD, y los impactos negativos del aislamiento en las sobredosis y la salud mental. También identificaron las oportunidades de mejorar los servicios futuros para las PWUD, incluyendo el cambio a prácticas de distribución basadas en evidencias y el mantenimiento de cambios regulatorios que aumentaran el acceso a medicamentos para el trastorno por consumo de opiáceos después de la pandemia. La información que se encontró en este estudio se puede utilizar junto los esfuerzos para apoyar a los SSP en la restauración y expansión de los servicios, y proporcionar información sobre el papel de los SSP en la participación de PWUD durante la respuesta covid-19 futuras emergencias.

Factors Associated with Likelihood of Initiating Others into Injection Drug Use Among People Who Inject Drugs in West Virginia.

People who inject drugs (PWID) play a critical role in injection-naïve individuals transitioning to injection drug use. We investigated factors associated with future likelihood of initiating injection-naïve individuals using multivariable logistic regression among 418 PWID in rural Appalachia (Cabell County, West Virginia). Less than 10% reported they were likely to initiate someone in the future. Acquiring syringes from a syringe services program was associated with decreased odds of being likely to initiate someone in the future (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.46, 95% CI 0.23, 0.95), while having previously initiated someone into injection drug use was associated with increased odds (aOR 8.65, 95% CI 4.07, 18.41). Among our sample of PWID in Appalachia, a small proportion reported that they would be likely to initiate an injection-naïve individual in the future. Efforts to reduce injection initiation assistance should focus on this subpopulation of PWID who indicate a willingness to engage in this behavior.

Implementation of buprenorphine services in NYC syringe services programs: a qualitative process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Syringe services programs (SSPs) hold promise for providing buprenorphine treatment access to people with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are reluctant to seek care elsewhere. In 2017, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) provided funding and technical assistance to nine SSPs to develop "low-threshold" buprenorphine services as part of a multipronged initiative to lower opioid-related overdose rates. The aim of this study was to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementing SSP-based buprenorphine services. METHODS: We conducted 26 semi-structured qualitative interviews from April 2019 to November 2019 at eight SSPs in NYC that received funding and technical assistance from DOHMH. Interviews were conducted with three categories of staff: leadership (i.e., buprenorphine program management or leadership, eight interviews), staff (i.e., buprenorphine coordinators or other staff, eleven interviews), and buprenorphine providers (six interviews). We identified themes related to barriers and facilitators to program implementation using thematic analysis. We make recommendations for implementation based on our findings. RESULTS: Programs differed in their stage of development, location of services provided, and provider type, availability, and practices. Barriers to providing buprenorphine services at SSPs included gaps in staff knowledge and comfort communicating with participants about buprenorphine, difficulty hiring buprenorphine providers, managing tension between harm reduction and traditional OUD treatment philosophies, and financial constraints. Challenges also arose from serving a population with unmet psychosocial needs. Implementation facilitators included technical assistance from DOHMH, designated buprenorphine coordinators, offering other supportive services to participants, and telehealth to bridge gaps in provider availability. Key recommendations include: (1) health departments should provide support for SSPs in training staff, building health service infrastructure and developing policies and procedures, (2) SSPs should designate a buprenorphine coordinator and ensure regular training on buprenorphine for frontline staff, and (3) buprenorphine providers should be selected or supported to use a harm reduction approach to buprenorphine treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite encountering challenges, SSPs implemented buprenorphine services outside of conventional OUD treatment settings. Our findings have implications for health departments, SSPs, and other community organizations implementing buprenorphine services. Expansion of low-threshold buprenorphine services is a promising strategy to address the opioid overdose epidemic.

Participant perceptions on the acceptability and feasibility of a telemedicine-based HIV PrEP and buprenorphine/naloxone program embedded within syringe services programs: a qualitative descriptive evaluation.

BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs (PWID) are at risk for HIV and opioid overdose. We piloted PARTNER UP, a telemedicine-based program to provide PWID with access to both oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention and medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) through two syringe services programs (SSPs) in North Carolina. We conducted a qualitative evaluation to assess the acceptability and feasibility of PARTNER UP from the participant perspective. METHODS: PARTNER UP participants met with a provider for an initial in-person visit at the SSP, followed by weekly telemedicine visits in month 1 and then monthly telemedicine visits until program end at month 6. Using a qualitative descriptive study design, we conducted in-depth interviews with a subsample of PARTNER UP participants at 1 month and 4 months. Informed by the technology acceptance model, we assessed participant perceptions of the usefulness and ease of use of PARTNER UP, as well as their intent to continue to use the program's components. We audio-recorded all interviews with participants' permission and used applied thematic analysis to analyze the verbatim transcripts. RESULTS: We interviewed 11 of 17 people who participated in PARTNER UP-10 in the month 1 interview and 8 in the month 4 interview. Nearly all participants were motivated to join for consistent and easy access to buprenorphine/naloxone (i.e., MOUD); only a few joined to access PrEP. Most were comfortable accessing healthcare at the SSP because of their relationship with and trust toward SSP staff, and accessing services at the SSP was preferred compared with other healthcare centers. Some participants described that telemedicine allowed them to be honest and share more information because the visits were not in-person and they chose the location, although the initial in-person meeting was helpful to build provider trust and rapport. Most participants found the visit schedule to be feasible, although half described needing to reschedule at least once. Nearly all participants who were interviewed intended to continue with MOUD after the program ended, whereas none were interested in continuing with PrEP. CONCLUSIONS: Participant narratives suggest that the PARTNER UP telemedicine program was acceptable and feasible. Future studies should continue to explore the benefits of embedding both PrEP and MOUD into SSPs with larger numbers of participants. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04521920.

Harm Reduction Policy Support among Students at Two U.S. Universities.

Background: The U.S. is undergoing an opioid overdose crisis. Harm reduction (HR) policies are associated with decreased overdose deaths and incidence of communicable diseases, yet legality of HR policies differs across U.S. jurisdictions. College student perceptions of HR policies are underexplored, even though their voting behavior has increased in recent years. We sought to compare their support of different HR policies and to explore relationships between demographic characteristics and support for HR policies. Methods: We collected cross-sectional, convenience sample survey data from undergraduate students at two large public universities, one in the Midwest and one in the Southeast, during Fall 2018/Spring 2019. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics and logistic regressions. Results: The final sample included 1,263 respondents. Good Samaritan laws (n = 833, 66%) and naloxone distribution (n = 476, 37.7%) were most commonly supported, while heroin maintenance treatment (n = 232, 18.4%) and heroin decriminalization (n = 208, 16.5%) were least supported. Democrat/liberal or less religious/spiritual respondents supported HR policies more than their Republican/conservative or religious/spiritual counterparts. Midwestern students were more likely to support syringe services programs. Conclusion: HR education initiatives could target religious and/or Republican/conservative students, as they have lower HR support. Among HR policies, Good Samaritan policies may be easiest to pass in college communities.

Harm Reduction and Adaptations Among PWUD in Rural Oregon During COVID-19.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) may influence HIV/HCV transmission risk behaviors in rural communities. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with people who use drugs (PWUD) in five rural Oregon counties and asked about COVID-19 impact on substance use and harm reduction practices and their advice for improving public health responses. Participants (n = 36) reported using only methamphetamine (52.8%), only heroin (16.7%), or both (30.6%); 75% of participants reported recent injection. Three thematic categories emerged: SSP adaptations and accessibility, PWUD harm reduction practices, and policy suggestions. Participants noted the importance of SSPs to COVID-19 prevention and wellbeing, though some experienced increased barriers, leading to increased risky injection practices. Participants suggested need-based rather than one-for-one exchange, increasing syringe delivery services, encouraging secondary exchange by PWUD, and peers as trusted voices for information exchange. Rapid implementation of policy and practice changes are urgently required to improve SSP access, reinforce safer use, and prevent HIV/HCV and COVID-19 transmission.

Acceptability of an mHealth App That Provides Harm Reduction Services Among People Who Inject Drugs: Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Harm reduction services reduce the negative consequences of drug injection and are often embedded within syringe service programs (SSPs). However, people who inject drugs (PWID) suboptimally engage with such services because of stigma, fear, transportation restrictions, and limited hours of operation. Mobile health (mHealth) apps may provide an opportunity to overcome these barriers and extend the reach of SSPs beyond that of the traditional brick-and-mortar models. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the prevalence of smartphone ownership, the level of comfort in providing the personal information required to use mHealth apps, and interest in using an mHealth app to access harm reduction services among PWID to guide the development of an app. METHODS: We administered a survey to 115 PWID who were enrolled via respondent-driven sampling from July 2018 to July 2019. We examined the extent to which PWID had access to smartphones; were comfortable in providing personal information such as name, email, and address; and expressed interest in various app-based services. We measured participant characteristics (demographics, health status, and behaviors) and used binary logistic and Poisson regressions to identify independent correlates of mHealth-related variables. The primary regression outcomes included summary scores for access, comfort, and interest. The secondary outcomes included binary survey responses for individual comfort or interest components. RESULTS: Most participants were White (74/105, 70.5%), male (78/115, 67.8%), and middle-aged (mean=41.7 years), and 67.9% (74/109) owned a smartphone. Participants reported high levels of comfort in providing personal information to use an mHealth app, including name (96/109, 88.1%), phone number (92/109, 84.4%), email (85/109, 77.9%), physical address (85/109, 77.9%), and linkage to medical records (72/109, 66.1%). Participants also reported strong interest in app-based services, including medication or sterile syringe delivery (100/110, 90.9%), lab or appointment scheduling (90/110, 81.8%), medication reminders (77/110, 70%), educational material (65/110, 59.1%), and group communication forums (64/110, 58.2%). Most participants were comfortable with the idea of home delivery of syringes (93/109, 85.3%). Homeless participants had lower access to smartphones (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.46; P=.001), but no other participant characteristics were associated with primary outcomes. Among secondary outcomes, recent SSP use was positively associated with comfort with the home delivery of syringes (AOR 3.29, 95% CI 1.04-10.3 P=.04), and being older than 50 years was associated with an increased interest in educational materials (AOR 4.64, 95% CI 1.31-16.5; P=.02) and group communication forums (AOR 3.69, 95% CI 1.10-12.4; P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that aside from those experiencing homelessness or unstable housing, PWID broadly have access to smartphones, are comfortable with sharing personal information, and express interest in a wide array of services within an app. Given the suboptimal access to and use of SSPs among PWID, an mHealth app has a high potential to address the harm reduction needs of this vulnerable population.

Implementation and first-year operating costs of an academic medical center-based syringe services program.

BACKGROUND: Syringe services programs (SSPs) remain highly effective, cost-saving interventions for the prevention of blood-borne infections among people who inject drugs. However, there have been restrictions regarding financial resources allocated to these programs, particularly in the US South. This study aimed to provide cost data regarding the implementation and first-year operations of an academic-based SSP utilizing fixed and mobile strategies, including the integration of onsite wound care. METHODS: We conducted a micro-costing study that retrospectively collected detailed resource utilization and unit cost data for both the fixed and mobile SSP strategies, including onsite wound care, from both healthcare and societal perspectives. A three-step approach was used to identify, measure, and value intervention costs, and cost components were categorized into implementation, variable program, and time-dependent costs. Sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the impact of SSP operational changes (i.e., needs-based distribution and opt-out HIV/HCV testing) on the cost-per-participant. Cost data we presented as overall cost and cost-per-participant adjusted to 2017 US dollars. RESULTS: A total of 452 and 129 participants enrolled in fixed and mobile SSP services, respectively. The total cost associated with implementation and first year operations for the fixed site was $407,217.22 or $729.72 per participant and $311,625.52 or $2415.70 per participant for the mobile unit. The largest cost component for both modalities was time-dependent costs (personnel and overhead), while intervention materials (syringes, injection equipment, naloxone) were less than 15% of the total program cost. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Implementation and operation of new SSP models continue to be low cost compared to treatment for the multitude of harms PWID face without access to evidence-based prevention. Future cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses integrating a comprehensive SSP model within an academic institution, including onsite wound care and other medical services, will provide a more comprehensive understanding of this model, and state-level policy action must be taken to lift the prohibition of state and local funds for the implementation, sustainability, and maintenance of these programs in Florida.

Factors that influence enrollment in syringe services programs in rural areas: a qualitative study among program clients in Appalachian Kentucky.

BACKGROUND: Enrolling sufficient number of people who inject drugs (PWID) into syringe services programs (SSP) is important to curtail outbreaks of drug-related harms. Still, little is known about barriers and facilitators to SSP enrollment in rural areas with no history of such programs. This study's purpose was to develop a grounded theory of the role of the risk environment and individual characteristics of PWID in shaping SSP enrollment in rural Kentucky. METHODS: We conducted one-on-one semi-structured interviews with 41 clients of 5 SSPs that were established in rural counties in Appalachian Kentucky in 2017-2018. Interviews covered PWID needs, the process of becoming aware of SSPs, and barriers and facilitators to SSP enrollment. Applying constructivist grounded theory methods and guided by the Intersectional Risk Environment Framework (IREF), we applied open, axial and selective coding to develop the grounded theory. RESULTS: Stigma, a feature of IREF's meso-level social domain, is the main factor hampering SSP enrollment. PWID hesitated to visit SSPs because of internalized stigma and because of anticipated stigma from police, friends, family and healthcare providers. Fear of stigma was often mitigated or amplified by a constellation of meso-level environmental factors related to healthcare (e.g., SSPs) and social (PWID networks) domains and by PWID's individual characteristics. SSPs mitigated stigma as a barrier to enrollment by providing low threshold services in a friendly atmosphere, and by offering their clients program IDs to protect them from paraphernalia charges. SSP clients spread positive information about the program within PWID networks and helped their hesitant peers to enroll by accompanying them to SSPs. Individual characteristics, including child custody, employment or high social status, made certain PWID more susceptible to drug-related stigma and hence more likely to delay SSP enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: Features of the social and healthcare environments operating at the meso-level, as well as PWID's individual characteristics, appear to enhance or mitigate the effect of stigma as a barrier to SSP enrollment. SSPs opening in locations with high stigma against PWID need to ensure low threshold and friendly services, protect their clients from police and mobilize PWID networks to promote enrollment.

Treatment experiences for skin and soft tissue infections among participants of syringe service programs in North Carolina.

INTRODUCTION: Bacterial and fungal infections, such as skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) and infective endocarditis (IE), are increasing among people who use drugs in the United States. Traditional healthcare settings can be inaccessible and unwelcoming to people who use drugs, leading to delays in getting necessary care. The objective of this study was to examine SSTI treatment experiences among people utilizing services from syringe services programs. This study was initiated by people with lived experience of drug use to improve quality of care. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among participants of five syringe services programs in North Carolina from July through September 2020. Surveys collected information on each participant's history of SSTIs and IE, drug use and healthcare access characteristics, and SSTI treatment experiences. We examined participant characteristics using counts and percentages. We also examined associations between participant characteristics and SSTI history using binomial linear regression models. RESULTS: Overall, 46% of participants reported an SSTI in the previous 12 months and 10% reported having IE in the previous 12 months. Those with a doctor they trusted with drug use-related concerns had 27 fewer (95% confidence interval = - 51.8, - 2.1) SSTIs per every 100 participants compared to those without a trusted doctor. Most participants with a SSTI history reported delaying (98%) or not seeking treatment (72%) for their infections. Concerns surrounding judgment or mistreatment by medical staff and self-treating the infection were common reasons for delaying or not seeking care. 13% of participants used antibiotics obtained from sources other than a medical provider to treat their most recent SSTI. Many participants suggested increased access to free antibiotics and on-site clinical care based at syringe service programs to improve treatment for SSTIs. CONCLUSIONS: Many participants had delayed or not received care for SSTIs due to poor healthcare experiences. However, having a trusted doctor was associated with fewer people with SSTIs. Improved access to non-judgmental healthcare for people who use drugs with SSTIs is needed. Expansion of syringe services program-based SSTI prevention and treatment programs is likely a necessary approach to improve outcomes among those with SSTI and IE.