RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Harm reduction is a term for strategies that minimize the negative outcomes of drug use. Given the progressing opioid epidemic, identifying barriers to harm reduction dispensing in community pharmacies is essential. METHODS: This online, survey-based study assessed community pharmacist attitudes toward harm reduction and perceived dispense rates of both naloxone and needles/syringes to patients without verifiable injectable prescriptions. The online survey was distributed to members of the Bexar County Pharmacist Association and university alumni. The survey collected demographics, perceived dispense rates of naloxone, needles and syringes, availability of pharmacy protocols for dispensing these products, and Likert-scaled attitudinal questions. Responses were collected for 6 weeks. RESULTS: Thirty-two survey responses were analyzed. Participants were generally white (n = 14) or Hispanic/Latino (n = 14), had a median age of 37 years (interquartile range, 32-49 years), and had a median graduation year of 2011 (interquartile range, 1988-2016). Most pharmacists agreed or strongly agreed they should be involved in harm reduction (n = 26) and that pharmacies are an appropriate place to access these resources (n = 26). However, most reported never or rarely dispensing both naloxone (n = 19) and needles and syringes (n = 22). Naloxone or needle and syringe protocol use was reported by 66% (n = 21) and 47% (n = 15) of pharmacists, respectively. Pharmacy protocols significantly enhanced the likelihood of naloxone dispensing (P = .007) but not needle and syringe dispensing (P = .24). CONCLUSION: Community pharmacists exhibited positive attitudes toward harm reduction but reported low rates of dispensing both naloxone and needles and syringes. Pharmacy protocols could be enhanced to better support community pharmacists in this area.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To examine barriers to nonprescription syringe sales (NPSS) in pharmacies by examining resistant pharmacists' willingness to provide syringes to people who inject drugs (PWID) and their current practices for provision or refusal. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured, in-depth interviews with community pharmacists in California, Kansas, Mississippi, and New Jersey. Participants include seventeen community pharmacists who expressed ethical concerns about providing syringes drawn from a larger sample of 71 community pharmacists participating in a study of ethical decision-making. Analysis captures pharmacists' descriptions of their experiences providing syringes to suspected PWID. RESULTS: Pharmacists who identified syringes as a key ethical issue exhibited significant ambivalence about providing syringes to PWID. Most of these pharmacists were aware of harm reduction logics, but endorsed them to varying degrees. Moral concerns about supplying PWID with syringes were mediated by law and organizational policy. Many pharmacists who considered syringes an ethical challenge allayed their concerns by creating informal policy and engaging in deterrence practices designed to dissuade PWID from coming to the pharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: As heroin abuse rates continue to rise, pharmacists are undoubtedly integral allies in the fight to prevent the spread of communicable diseases like HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis C. Education should be aimed at identifying barriers to NPSS resulting from resistant pharmacists' attitudes and practices. Increased education paired with favorable law and organizational policy and decentralization of syringe provision could increase access to clean needles and decrease public health risks.