Search

Background: Stimulant-involved overdose deaths are increasing, driven by polysubstance use and adulteration of the illicit drug supply. While emerging evidence for prescription stimulant substitution is promising, there are no approved treatment options for stimulant use disorder that address the realities of an unpredictable drug supply. This study explores treatment experiences of people who use illicit stimulants (PWUS) to identify gaps and perceptions of prospective pharmaceutical stimulant substitution treatments (SST)., Methods: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 86 PWUS in Vancouver, Canada. Thematic analysis focused on experiences of available treatment options for stimulant use and perceptions of prospective SST., Results: Participants identified how primarily behavioral treatment approaches do not meet the unique needs of PWUS, in contrast with the range of medical treatments available for opioid use disorder. Participants anticipated health and social benefits if they were able to access SST, including avoiding the toxic illicit stimulant supply, reduced engagement in criminalized activities, and greater economic security. Perceptions of prospective SST were informed by knowledge of existing opioid treatments. This led some participants to be unsupportive of SST, citing concerns around agency and highly regulated operational contexts that do not align with the lived realities of stimulant use., Conclusion: Findings demonstrate the need for SST pilot programs in real-world settings and underscore the health and social advantages SST may offer; although drawing on existing opioid treatment models to implement SST pilots may limit success. Thus, any novel treatments for stimulant use must centre the lived realities of PWUS., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The dominant focus of North America's current overdose crisis has been opioids, resulting in considerable research and harm reduction efforts to address opioid-related overdose risks. Less attention has been paid to people who use stimulants (PWUS) despite recent increases in stimulant use and stimulant-involved overdoses (i.e., "overamping"). Stimulant users' definitions, risk factors and experiences of, and responses to, overamping are poorly understood, thereby putting PWUS at heightened risk of adverse health outcomes. This study explores how PWUS understand, experience, and respond to overamping., Methods: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 61 PWUS in Vancouver, Canada's Downtown Eastside neighbourhood. Thematic analysis of interviews focused on contextualizing stimulant overdoses, including how PWUS understand, define, experience, and respond to overamping., Results: Participants associated overamping experiences with commonly identified signs and symptoms, such as rapid onset, elevated heart rate, incontinence, and audiovisua hallucinations, but also reported more serious indicators of overamping, such as unconsciousness, cardiac arrests and seizures. Our findings demonstrate that, among PWUS, there was no unified understanding of overamping such as with opioid overdose and individual experiences had substantial variation in severity and presentation. This impacted the ability to adequately respond to stimulant overdoses, which were primarily self-managed through methods including stabilizing breathing, polysubstance use, and cold showers., Conclusion: Given the growing role of stimulants in North America's overdose crisis, there is an urgent need to improve the identification of stimulant overdoses in real world settings. Our findings identify a gap in current understandings of stimulant overdose, and demonstrate the need for public health and harm reduction interventions to better address overamp risk among PWUS, including harm reduction campaigns to disseminate information regarding identifying signs of, and proper responses to, overamping., Competing Interests: Declarations of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)