Search

Background: In response to the devastating drug toxicity crisis in Canada driven by an unregulated opioid supply predominantly composed of fentanyl and analogues, safer supply programs have been introduced. These programs provide people using street-acquired opioids with prescribed, pharmaceutical opioids. We use six core components of safer supply programs identified by people who use drugs to explore participant perspectives on the first year of operations of a safer supply program in Victoria, BC, during the dual public health emergencies of COVID-19 and the drug toxicity crisis to examine whether the program met drug-user defined elements of an effective safer supply model. Methods: This study used a community-based participatory research approach to ensure that the research was reflective of community concerns and priorities, rather than being extractive. We interviewed 16 safer supply program participants between December 2020 and June 2021. Analysis was structured using the six core components of effective safer supply from the perspective of people who use drugs, generated through a prior study. Results: Ensuring access to the 'right dose and right drugs' of medications was crucial, with many participants reporting success with the available pharmaceutical options. However, others highlighted issues with the strength of the available medications and the lack of options for smokeable medications. Accessing the safer supply program allowed participants to reduce their use of drugs from unregulated markets and manage withdrawal, pain and cravings. On components related to program operations, participants reported receiving compassionate care, and that accessing the safer supply program was a non-stigmatizing experience. They also reported receiving support to find housing, access food, obtain ID, and other needs. However, participants worried about long term program sustainability. Conclusions: Participants in the safer supply program overwhelmingly appreciated it and felt it was lifesaving, and unlike other healthcare or treatment services they had previously accessed. Participants raised concerns that unless a wider variety of medications and ability to consume them by multiple routes of administration became available, safer supply programs would remain unable to completely replace substances from unregulated markets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Drug checking services aim to provide compositional information for the illicit drug supply and are being employed in public health responses to extreme rates of overdose associated with fentanyl within street opioids. The technologies used within these services range from basic qualitative tests, such as immunoassay test strips, to comprehensive quantitative analyses, such as mass spectrometry. In general, there is concern that heterogeneity of a drug mixture adds significant uncertainty when using drug checking results based on a small subsamples. The presence of hot spots of active drug components in this context is often termed the 'chocolate chip cookie effect'. Establishing the limitations of the service are essential for interpretation of the results. Methods: This study assesses the consequence of drug heterogeneity and sampling of consumer level opioid purchased in Victoria, British Columbia ( n = 21 , 50–100 mg each) on quantitative fentanyl results determined from testing with paper spray mass spectrometry. Results: Using descriptive statistics, such as relative standard deviation and interquartile range, the results demonstrate varied distributions of fentanyl concentrations within a single drug batch. However, the presence of hot spots, defined as outliers, were relatively rare. Conclusions: This study found that the variability in fentanyl concentration from drug heterogeneity and sampling is greater than that attributed to the analytical technique. On a practical level, this provides data to help guide communication of limitations of drug checking services, supporting the aim of trust and transparency between services and people who use drugs. However, if drug checking services continue to be restricted from fully engaging with the reality of manufacturing, buying, selling, mixing and dosing practices, the accuracy, usefulness, and impact will always be limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Smoking is the most common mode of unregulated opioid consumption overall and implicated in fatal overdoses in British Columbia (BC). In part, perception of decreased risk (e.g., fewer who smoke carry naloxone kits) and limited smoking-specific harm reduction services contribute to overdose deaths. Overdose prevention services (OPS) offer supervised settings for drug use. Continuous pulse oximetry, common in acute care, allows real-time, remote oxygen monitoring. We evaluated the effectiveness of a novel continuous pulse oximetry protocol aimed at allowing physical distancing (as required by COVID-19, secluded spaces, and to avoid staff exposure to vaporized opioids), its feasibility, and acceptability at OPS for people who smoke opioids. Methods: This was a mixed methods survey study. We developed a continuous pulse oximetry protocol in collaboration with clinical experts and people with lived/living experience of substance use. We implemented our protocol from March to August 2021 at four OPS in BC permitting smoking. We included adults (≥ 18 years) presenting to OPS to smoke opioids. Peer researchers collected demographic, health, and substance use information, and conducted structured observations. OPS clients participating in our study, OPS staff, and peer researchers completed post-monitoring surveys. We analyzed responses using a thematic inductive approach and validated themes with peer researchers. Results: We included 599 smoking events. OPS clients participating in our study had a mean age of 38.5 years; 73% were male. Most (98%) reported using "down", heroin, or fentanyl; 48% concurrently used other substances (32% of whom reported stimulants); 76% reported smoking alone in the last 3 days; and 36% reported an overdose while smoking. Respondents reported that the protocol facilitated physical distancing, was easy to use, high satisfaction, improved confidence, improved sense of safety, and that they would use it again. Conclusions: Continuous pulse oximetry allowed safe physical distancing, was feasible, and acceptable in monitoring people who smoke opioids at OPS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Peer workers (those with lived/living experience of substance use) are at the forefront of overdose response initiatives in British Columbia, Canada. The onset of the coronavirus disease pandemic has significantly compounded the impact of the overdose crisis. Peer workers are integral in supporting people who use substances. However, despite the important work they do, peer workers often lack formalized credibility and do not have the same resources available to them as service providers without lived experience. The peer-led project titled the Peer2Peer Project implemented several support programs for peer workers, including providing pulse oximeters to peer workers to supplement their overdose response procedures. Materials and methods: This study was a component of a larger evaluation of the pulse oximeter program at two organizations in BC. The study aims to highlight the competencies of peer workers who use pulse oximeters. Telephone interviews were conducted with seven peer workers who were given pulse oximeters. The transcripts were thematically coded using Covert et al.'s framework of core competencies of community health workers to compare our sample with other widely recognized professions. Findings: We found that peer workers who used pulse oximeters described several core competencies in their work and these were aligned with Covert et al.'s core competencies for community health workers, including assessment, community health practice, communication, diversity and inclusion, professional practice, and disease prevention and management. Conclusion: By aligning peer workers' skills to those of community health workers, we create awareness on the competencies of peer workers in using oximeters to supplement overdose response and advocate for them to receive more recognition and respect within the workplace. Further, our findings act as groundwork for future research in identifying the professional proficiencies of peer workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The emergence of COVID-19 introduced a dual public health emergency in British Columbia, which was already in the fourth year of its opioid-related overdose crisis. The public health response to COVID-19 must explicitly consider the unique needs of, and impacts on, communities experiencing marginalisation including people with opioid use disorder (PWOUD). The broad move to virtual forms of primary care, for example, may result in changes to healthcare access, delivery of opioid agonist therapies or fluctuations in co-occurring health problems that are prevalent in this population. The goal of this mixed-methods study is to characterise changes to primary care access and patient outcomes following the rapid introduction of virtual care for PWOUD., Methods and Analysis: We will use a fully integrated mixed-methods design comprised of three components: (a) qualitative interviews with family physicians and PWOUD to document experiences with delivering and accessing virtual visits, respectively; (b) quantitative analysis of linked, population-based administrative data to describe the uptake of virtual care, its impact on access to services and downstream outcomes for PWOUD; and (c) facilitated deliberative dialogues to co-create educational resources for family physicians, PWOUD and policymakers that promote equitable access to high-quality virtual primary care for this population., Ethics and Dissemination: Approval for this study has been granted by Research Ethics British Columbia. We will convene PWOUD and family physicians for deliberative dialogues to co-create educational materials and policy recommendations based on our findings. We will also disseminate findings via traditional academic outputs such as conferences and peer-reviewed publications., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)