Search

Background: In March 2020, following a provincial COVID-19 emergency declaration, modifications to opioid agonist treatment (OAT) were introduced in Ontario, Canada to promote treatment access amid the pandemic and ongoing opioid overdose crisis. Modifications included federal exemptions to facilitate OAT prescription re-fills, extensions, and deliveries and interim treatment guidance emphasizing take-home (non-observed) doses and reduced urine drug screening for OAT patients., Methods: We conducted an interrupted time series study using health administrative data from September 17 th , 2019-September 21 st , 2020, on 359 people who inject drugs with suspected opioid use disorder in Toronto, Ontario. We used segmented regression analyses to evaluate the joint effects of the provincial COVID-19 emergency declaration, federal OAT exemptions, and interim treatment guidance-all implemented between March 17 th -23 rd , 2020-on the weekly proportion of participants enrolled in OAT (i.e., ≥1 day(s) covered with methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone), with an opioid-related overdose (based on emergency department visits and hospitalizations), and who died (all-cause), and the weekly proportion of OAT-enrolled participants receiving take-home doses (i.e., ≥1 day(s) covered) and undergoing urine drug screening., Results: Post-implementation, the interventions were associated with immediate absolute changes in OAT enrollment (+1.95%; 95% CI=0.04%-3.85%), receipt of take-home doses (+18.3%; 95% CI=13.2%-23.4%), and urine drug screening (-22.4%; 95% CI=[-26.9%]-[-17.9%]) and a gradual absolute increase of 0.56% in urine drug screening week-to-week (95% CI=0.27%-0.86%) beyond the pre-implementation trend. At 26 weeks post-implementation, OAT enrollment and urine drug screening approached pre-implementation levels whereas the increase in take-home doses was largely sustained (+15.0%; 95% CI=4.33%-25.6%). No post-implementation increases in opioid-related overdoses were observed. Death was not modelled (low event frequency)., Conclusion: Changes to OAT provision following provincial COVID-19 restrictions were associated with an immediate and sustained increase in take-home dose coverage among OAT-enrolled participants, without corresponding increases in opioid-related overdoses among all participants., Competing Interests: Declarations of Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Aiming to reducing overdose mortality, over 40 supervised drug consumption services (SCS) presently operate in Canada. Arguments against SCS include the potential for increased non-fatal overdoses mediated by risk compensation. This study estimates associations between SCS use and recent non-fatal overdose among people who inject drugs (PWID)., Methods: We analyzed cross-sectional baseline data collected between November 2018 and March 2020 from a cohort of adult PWID in Toronto, Canada. Recent non-fatal overdose was self-reported over the previous six months. The primary exposure was frequency of SCS use, self-reported as the proportion of injections performed at an SCS (all or most [75-100%], some [26-74%], few [≤25%], or none) in the previous six months. The prevalence of recent overdose was compared between all unique pairs of groups based on their frequency of SCS use and expressed as covariate-adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) estimated using modified Poisson regression., Results: Among 701 PWID (median [IQR] age, 40 [33 to 49]; 64.3% cisgender men; 56.8% injecting daily), most reported SCS use (all/most, 26.2%; some, 30.9%; few, 29.4%) versus no use (13.5%), with 38.6% reporting a recent overdose. From adjusted regression analyses, more frequent SCS use was not statistically significantly associated with overdose when compared to either no SCS use or less frequent use. Associations between SCS use frequency and overdose were notably smaller among SCS clients compared to associations between SCS clients and non-users (e.g., all/most versus none: PR, 1.43 [95% CI, 0.93 to 2.21]; all/most versus some: PR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.17]; all/most versus few: PR, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.48])., Conclusion: Findings did not indicate statistically significant associations between SCS use frequency and recent non-fatal overdose, particularly among SCS clients who may be more comparable. Nevertheless, overdose was common, underscoring the need to prevent non-fatal overdose and associated morbidity., Competing Interests: Declaration of Interests We have no competing interests to declare, (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)