RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To identify faith-based leaders' (FBLs') knowledge, perceptions, and questions about syringe services programs (SSPs). METHODS: We conducted a one-time, national online survey of 461 Christian FBLs August-September 2022. RESULTS: 56% of FBLs agreed they support having SSPs in their communities; only 7% strongly disagreed. We identified 15 main questions FBLs have about SSPs. We found statistically significant differences based on FBL Protestant affiliations. Mainline FBLs are more knowledgeable about SSPs, likely to believe a larger number of SSP services would benefit their community, supportive of SSPs, interested in data related to SSPs, and likely to look to local public health officials to shape their opinions on SSPs compared with non-mainline FBLs. CONCLUSIONS: SSP advocates can address questions that FBLs have about SSPs before beginning outreach. By understanding common Protestant denominational affiliations, advocates can focus initial engagement efforts on FBLs in their communities who are more likely to support SSPs. Our findings suggest that local public health officials can influence FBLs' opinions about SSPs.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Syringe Services Programs (SSPs) provide evidence-based services like drug use equipment to prevent infectious disease, overdose prevention education, and naloxone distribution to people who use drugs (PWUD). However, inadequate funding threatens provision of these interventions. This study aimed to document how the current funding landscape impacted determinants of SSP implementation, particularly describing financial and staffing barriers, facilitators, and proposed strategies, using qualitative methods informed by three implementation research frameworks. We interviewed 20 leaders of SSPs in the United States using a semi-structured interview guide. Participants described how structural stigma against PWUD led to insufficient and restrictive funding, and burdensome reporting for SSPs. This resulted in harming program implementation outcomes like reach, fidelity, and sustainability. Inadequate funding also led to insufficient staffing and subsequent staff stress, burnout, and turnover. Taken together, these barriers threatened the implementation of evidence-based interventions that SSPs provided, ultimately harming their ability to effectively address health outcomes like infectious disease transmission and opioid overdose mortality within their communities. Interviewees described how upstream policy strategies like political advocacy might address structural stigma at the federal level. Participants also highlighted state-level efforts like harm reduction-centered funding, technical assistance and capacity-building, and clearinghouse programs that may facilitate better implementation and health outcomes. A more robust understanding of the relationship between financial barriers, facilitators, and strategies on implementation and health outcomes represents a novel and vital area of research within harm reduction literature.

RESUMEN

The COVID-19 pandemic strained the U.S. health care system, posing logistical challenges for community-based programs. This study surveyed 11 program directors in sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics and syringe services programs (SSPs) that served people who use substances and are at risk for HIV in five southeastern U.S. states. Brief survey questions asked about programs' use of in-person and telehealth services. Results indicated widespread reduction of in-person services and concomitant adoption of telehealth services. In STI clinics, telehealth replaced in-person visits for all but urgent treatment of active symptoms. In SSPs, in-person contact continued or increased from pre-pandemic volumes. In both programs, the most salient telehealth use barrier was limited device or internet access and limited technological ease. Services were sustained through innovative adaptations. This snapshot of response to the early COVID-19 lockdown phase offers actionable guidance about service preparedness for future public health catastrophes in community-based programs serving vulnerable populations.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: As injection drug use has increased in the US, so too has the prevalence of receptive syringe sharing. Since the 1980s, Needle and Syringe Programs (NSPs) have been an important source of clean injection equipment and disposal of used syringes. This study reports national syringe coverage and examines the impact of program attributes on organizational-level service uptake, defined as number of syringes distributed per participant contact per year. METHODS: In 2019 and 2020, we administered an annual cross-sectional survey to NSPs operating in the US (n = 260). A national estimate of coverage was calculated by dividing the total number of syringes distributed by the 2019 and 2020 population estimate of people who inject drugs (PWID). Frequency distributions and percentages were calculated for categorical variables (e.g., funding, census region, distribution policy/modality), and median and interquartile ranges (IQR) were calculated for continuous variables (e.g., participant contacts, syringes distributed). Bivariate and multivariable mixed effects logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratio associated with organizational characteristics on increasing service uptake at the NSP level. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2020, the total number of participant contacts by NSPs increased from 871,976 to 898,891, and the number of syringes distributed increased from 92,648,529 to 113,071,748. The national coverage estimate increased from 29.5 (95 % CI = 15.0, 58.2) to 35.8 (95 % CI = 18.2, 70.6) syringes per PWID. Fifty-eight percent of NSPs increased service uptake in 2020 as compared to the previous year. NSPs that received government funding and NSPs that changed to a less restrictive syringe distribution policy were more likely to increase service uptake (aOR 1.80, 95 % CI = 1.01, 3.22 and aOR 3.33, 95 % CI = 1.11, 9.94, respectively). Syringe distribution modalities also diversified, with more NSPs reaching participants via backpacking/outreach, fixed site pop-ups, mobile delivery, mail-based delivery, leaving supplies out, and secondary distribution. CONCLUSION: Both governmental investment in harm reduction programming and needs-based distribution of syringes increased service uptake and thus should be expanded and sustained to reduce harms associated with injection drug use.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction: The widespread HIV epidemic in Ukraine is concentrated among people who inject drugs (PWID), making access to sterile injection paraphernalia (SIP) like sterile needles and syringes a critical method of HIV/AIDS prevention; however, the Russian invasion has threatened to disrupt the operations of syringe services programs (SSPs), creating a risk of HIV outbreaks among PWID. Methods: We conducted 10 semi-structured interviews with outreach workers from SSPs. Interviews were purposively sampled to cover three prototypic regions of Ukraine: temporarily Russian-controlled, frontline, and destination. Qualitative results from interviews were then compared against a standardized, nationwide harm reduction database. Results: We found that the Russian invasion triggered both supply and demand challenges for SSPs. Demand increased for all regions due to client transitions from pharmacies that closed to SSPs, increases in illicit drug use, greater client openness to NGO support, and displacement of clients to destination regions. Supply decreased for all areas (except for remote destination regions) due to battle-related barriers like curfews, roadblocks, and Internet disruptions; diminished deliveries of SIP and funding; and staff displacement. Time series plots of the number of unique clients accessing harm reduction services showed that an initial decrease in service provision occurred at the start of the war but that most regions recovered within several months except for Russian-controlled regions, which continued to provide services to fewer clients relative to previous years. Conclusion: To ensure continued scale-up of SIP and other HIV prevention services, the SyrEx database should be leveraged to serve as a streamlined harm reduction locator that can inform workers and clients of open site locations and other pertinent information.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Syringe services programs (SSPs) provide a spectrum of health services to people who use drugs, with many providing referral and linkage to substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and some offering co-located treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). The objective of this study was to review the evidence for SSPs as an entry point for SUD treatment with particular attention to co-located (onsite) MOUD. METHODS: We performed a scoping review of the literature on SUD treatment for SSP participants. Our initial query in PubMed led to title and abstract screening of 3587 articles, followed by full text review of 173, leading to a final total of 51 relevant articles. Most articles fell into four categories: (1) description of SSP participants' SUD treatment utilization; (2) interventions to link SSP participants to SUD treatment; (3) post-linkage SUD treatment outcomes; (4) onsite MOUD at SSPs. RESULTS: SSP participation is associated with entering SUD treatment. Barriers to treatment entry for SSP participants include: use of stimulants, lack of health insurance, residing far from treatment programs, lack of available appointments, and work or childcare responsibilities. A small number of clinical trials demonstrate that two interventions (motivational enhancement therapy with financial incentives and strength-based case management) are effective for linking SSP participants to MOUD or any SUD treatment. SSP participants who initiate MOUD reduce their substance use, risk behaviors, and have moderate retention in treatment. An increasing number of SSPs across the United States offer onsite buprenorphine treatment, and a number of single-site studies demonstrate that patients who initiate buprenorphine treatment at SSPs reduce opioid use, risk behaviors, and have similar retention in treatment to patients in office-based treatment programs. CONCLUSIONS: SSPs can successfully refer participants to SUD treatment and deliver onsite buprenorphine treatment. Future studies should explore strategies to optimize the implementation of onsite buprenorphine. Because linkage rates were suboptimal for methadone, offering onsite methadone treatment at SSPs may be an appealing solution, but would require changes in federal regulations. In tandem with continuing to develop onsite treatment capacity, funding should support evidence-based linkage interventions and increasing accessibility, availability, affordability and acceptability of SUD treatment programs.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: At the start of the pandemic, relaxation of buprenorphine prescribing regulations created an opportunity to create new models of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) delivery and care. To expand and improve access to MOUD, we adapted and implemented the Tele-Harm Reduction (THR) intervention; a multicomponent, telehealth-based and peer-driven intervention to promote HIV viral suppression among people who inject drugs (PWID) accessing a syringe services program (SSP). This study examined buprenorphine initiation and retention among PWID with opioid use disorder who received the adapted THR intervention at the IDEA Miami SSP.Methods: A retrospective chart review of participants who received the THR intervention for MOUD was performed to examine the impact of telehealth on buprenorphine retention. Our primary outcome was three-month retention, defined as three consecutive months of buprenorphine dispensed from the pharmacy.Results: A total of 109 participants received the adapted THR intervention. Three-month retention rate on buprenorphine was 58.7%. Seeing a provider via telehealth at baseline or any follow up visit (aOR = 7.53, 95% CI: [2.36, 23.98]) and participants who had received an escalating dose of buprenorphine after baseline visit (aOR = 8.09, 95% CI: [1.83, 35.87]) had a higher adjusted odds of retention at three months. Participants who self-reported or tested positive for a stimulant (methamphetamine, amphetamine, or cocaine) at baseline had a lower adjusted odds of retention on buprenorphine at three months (aOR = 0.29, 95% CI: [0.09, 0.93]).Conclusions: Harm reduction settings can adapt dynamically to the needs of PWID in provision of critical lifesaving buprenorphine in a truly destigmatising approach. Our pilot suggests that an SSP may be an acceptable and feasible venue for delivery of THR to increase uptake of buprenorphine by PWID and promote retention in care.KEY MESSAGESThe Tele-Harm Reduction intervention can be adapted for initiating and retaining people who inject drugs with opioid use disorder on buprenorphine within a syringe services program settingUsing telehealth was associated with increased three-month buprenorphine retentionBaseline stimulant use was negatively associated with three-month buprenorphine retention.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Among people who inject drugs (PWID), obtaining syringes via syringe services programs (SSPs) and pharmacies reduces injection sharing practices associated with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Whether indirect use of SSPs via secondary exchange confers a similar benefit remains unknown, particularly in rural settings. We compared HCV serostatus and injection sharing practices by primary syringe source among a sample of rural PWID. METHODS: Data are from a cross-sectional study of adults who use drugs recruited from eleven rural counties in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts using respondent-driven sampling (2018-2019). Study staff performed HCV antibody testing. An audio computer-assisted self-interview assessed sociodemographic characteristics, past 30-day injection practices, and past 30-day primary syringe source. Primary syringe source was classified as direct SSP, pharmacy, indirect SSP (secondary exchange), or "other" (friend/acquaintance, street seller, partner/relative, found them). Mixed effects modified Poisson models assessed the association of primary syringe source with HCV seroprevalence and injection sharing practices. RESULTS: Among 397 PWID, the most common primary syringe source was "other" (33%), then pharmacies (27%), SSPs (22%), and secondary exchange (18%). In multivariable models, compared with those obtaining most syringes from "other" sources, those obtaining most syringes from pharmacies had a lower HCV seroprevalence [adjusted prevalence ratio (APR):0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-0.9985]; however, the upper bound of the 95% CI was close to 1.0. Compared with those obtaining most syringes from other sources, PWID obtaining most syringes directly from SSPs or pharmacies were less likely to report borrowing used syringes [APR(SSP):0.60, 95% CI 0.43-0.85 and APR(Pharmacies):0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.93], borrowing used injection equipment [APR(SSP):0.59, 95% CI 0.50-0.69 and APR (Pharmacies):0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.98], and backloading [APR(SSP):0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.88 and APR(Pharmacies):0.78, 95% CI 0.67-0.91]. Potential inverse associations between obtaining most syringes via secondary exchange and injection sharing practices did not reach the threshold for statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: PWID in rural New England largely relied on informal syringe sources (i.e., secondary exchange or sources besides SSPs/pharmacies). Those obtaining most syringes from an SSP or pharmacy were less likely to share injection equipment/syringes and had a lower HCV seroprevalence, which suggests using these sources reduces the risk of new HCV infections or serves as proxy for past injection behavior.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: We aimed to report the preliminary xylazine prevalence among people who inject drugs (PWID) treated at a student-run free clinic in Miami, FL, USA and to identify characteristics associated with screening positive for xylazine. Methods: A retrospective chart review of 59 patients presenting to a syringe services program (SSP) clinic in was conducted between April 27th and August 17th, 2023. We measured presence of xylazine with rapid visual immunoassay strips on patient urine samples. Results: Xylazine was present in 55.9 % (33/59) of urine samples including 2 without detected opioids. Xylazine presence was significantly associated with unsheltered homelessness (p = 0.018), presence of wound(s) (p = 0.008), and testing positive for hepatitis C antibody (p = 0.014), fentanyl (p = 0.005) and MDMA (p = 0.002). Conclusions: A high prevalence of xylazine in the Southeastern United States furthers evidence of the geographical spread of xylazine and rapidly evolving illicit drug supply. Widespread xylazine screening is urgently needed to inform people who inject drugs and to studyinterventions to minimize harms associated with xylazine.