Search

Background Syringe services programs (SSPs) complement substance use disorder treatment in providing services that improve the health of people who use drugs (PWUD). Buprenorphine treatment is an effective underutilized opioid use disorder treatment. Regulations allow buprenorphine prescribing from office-based settings, potentially including SSPs although few studies have examined this approach. Our objective was to assess the attitudes among PWUD toward the potential introduction of buprenorphine treatment in an SSP. Methods In this qualitative study, we recruited 34 participants who were enrolled at a New York City-based SSP to participate in one of seven focus group sessions. The focus group facilitators prompted participants to share their thoughts in five domains: attitudes toward (1) medical clinics; (2) harm reduction in general; (3) SSP-based buprenorphine treatment; (4) potential challenges of SSP-based treatment; and (5) logistical considerations of an SSP-based buprenorphine treatment program. Four researchers analyzed focus group transcripts using thematic analysis. Results Of the 34 participants, most were white (68%), over the age of 40 years old (56%), and had previously tried buprenorphine (89%). Common themes were: 1) The SSP is a supportive community for people who use drugs; 2) Participants felt less stigmatized at the SSP than in general medical settings; 3) Offering buprenorphine treatment could change the SSP's culture; and 4) SSP participants receiving buprenorphine may be tempted to divert their medication. Participants offered suggestions for a slow intentional introduction of buprenorphine treatment at the SSP including structured appointments, training medical providers in harm reduction, and program eligibility criteria. Conclusion Overall, participants expressed enthusiasm for onsite buprenorphine treatment at SSPs. Research on SSP-based buprenorphine treatment should investigate standard buprenorphine treatment outcomes but also any effects on the program itself and medication diversion. Implementation should consider cultural and environmental aspects of the SSP and consult program staff and participants.

Background Drug overdose is the leading cause of accidental death in the United States (U.S.). Previous studies have found that place of drug use is associated with risks including overdose, sharing of drug use equipment, and arrest, but the research on this subject in the U.S. is limited. Methods Our study describes the relationship between place of drug use and health outcomes through the analysis of associations between frequent public drug use and drug-related arrest, overdose, and reuse of injection equipment. We analysed data from a cross-sectional, observational study of individuals who utilize syringe exchange services in 8 U.S. cities. Using regression analysis, we assessed associations between public drug use, demographic characteristics, and health risks. Results Half (48%) of the respondents (N = 575) reported that at least one of their top two most frequent places of drug use is a public place. Street homelessness (AOR = 17.44), unstable housing (AOR = 3.43) and being under age 30 (AOR = 1.85) were independently associated with increased odds of frequent public drug use. Frequent public drug use was associated with increased odds of past-year arrest for drug-related offenses (AOR = 1.87). Conclusion Public drug use is associated with negative health and social outcomes. Increased access to harm reduction services, housing, and supervised consumption sites (SCS) interventions and a shift away from punitive approaches to drug use may reduce the some of the harms associated with public drug use.

The spaces in which drug use occurs constitutes a key aspect of the "risk environment" of people who inject drugs (PWID). We aimed to add nuance to the characterization of "safe" and "unsafe" spaces in PWID's environments to further understand how these spaces amplify the risk of morbidities associated with injection drug use. PWID were recruited through the Baltimore City syringe service program and through peer referral. Participants completed a socio-behavioral survey. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify associations between utilization of public, semi-public and private spaces with arrest, non-fatal overdose, and receptive syringe sharing. The sample of PWID (N = 283) was mostly 45 years and older (54%), male (69%), Black (55%), and heroin users (96%). Compared to PWID who primarily used private settings, the adjusted odds of recent overdose were greater among PWID who mostly used semi-public and public locations to inject drugs. We also found independent associations between arrest and semi-public spaces, and between receptive syringe sharing and public spaces (all p 0.05). This study highlights the need for safe spaces where PWID can reduce their risk of overdose, likelihood of arrest and blood-borne diseases, and the dual potential of the environment in promoting health and risk.

Background Little is known about the engagement of young people who use drugs (PWUD) in harm reduction programs (HRPs), and few studies have included non-opioid users and non-injectors. While HRPs have effectively engaged PWUD, young people are under-represented in their services. Methods The Injection Drug Users Health Alliance Citywide Study (IDUCS) is the largest community-based study of PWUD in HRPs in the US. From 2014–2015, 2421 HRP participants across New York City (NYC) completed a cross-sectional survey. We investigated differences in socio-demographics, service utilization, and risk behaviors between young (aged 18–30) and older participants and examined factors associated with overdose among young participants. Results The study included 257 young participants. They were significantly more likely than older participants to be white, educated, uninsured, unstably housed or homeless, and have a history of incarceration and residential drug treatment. They were more likely to report recent overdose but less likely to report knowledge of naloxone. Young participants also had higher rates of alcohol, marijuana, benzodiazepine, and injection drug use, and related risk behaviors such as public injection. Factors associated with past year overdose among young participants included experiencing symptoms of psychological distress (AOR = 9.71), being unstably housed or homeless (AOR = 4.39), and utilizing detox (AOR = 4.20). Conclusions Young PWUD who access services at HRPs in NYC differ significantly from their older counterparts. New York City and other urban centers that attract young PWUD should consider implementing harm reduction oriented services tailored to the unique needs of young people.

Background The majority of Americans with opioid use disorder remain out of treatment. Operating in 33 states, Washington DC, and Puerto Rico, harm reduction agencies, which provide sterile syringes and other health services to people who inject drugs, are a key venue to reach out-of-treatment opioid users. Aiming to link out-of-treatment individuals with opioid use disorder to buprenorphine treatment, we developed a community-based buprenorphine treatment (CBBT) intervention in collaboration with New York City harm reduction agencies. Methods Intervention development included formative data collection, feasibility testing at one harm reduction agency, and pilot testing for preliminary effectiveness at a second harm reduction agency. We used a pre-post design for both feasibility and pilot testing. In the CBBT intervention, we trained harm reduction agency staff to provide (1) buprenorphine education, (2) motivational interviewing, (3) referrals to buprenorphine-prescribing doctors, and (4) treatment retention support. We assessed feasibility by measuring staff satisfaction with the intervention and changes in knowledge about buprenorphine. We assessed preliminary effectiveness by comparing rates of buprenorphine initiation among groups of harm reduction agency clients before and after intervention implementation. Results Among staff members at the first harm reduction agency, knowledge increased from 52% correct answers pre-intervention to 79% correct post-intervention. Among clients at the second harm reduction agency, initiation of buprenorphine treatment was low and did not differ between pre- and post-intervention groups. Conclusions The CBBT intervention was feasible and well-received, but initiation of buprenorphine treatment among harm reduction agency clients was low. More robust interventions may be necessary to increase initiation of buprenorphine treatment.

Background Harm reduction agencies complement addiction treatment by providing diverse services that improve the health of people who use drugs. Buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) is an effective opioid addiction treatment that may be provided from flexible settings, potentially including harm reduction agencies. This study investigated attitudes toward different potential sites for BMT (harm reduction agencies, general medical clinics, and drug treatment programs) among harm reduction clients. Methods Using computer-based interviews, participants indicated preferred potential site for BMT (harm reduction agency, drug treatment program, or general medical clinic), interest in BMT by potential site, motivation for treatment, and barriers to BMT. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with harm reduction agency preference. Results Of 102 opioid users, the most preferred potential site for BMT was a harm reduction agency (51%), whereas fewer preferred general medical clinics (13%), drug treatment programs (12%), or were not interested in BMT (25%). In multivariable analysis, experiencing ≥1 barrier to BMT was strongly associated with preferring harm reduction agencies (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.39, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00–11.43). Conclusions The potential to initiate BMT at harm reduction agencies is highly favorable among harm reduction clients, especially among those experiencing barriers to BMT. Offering BMT at harm reduction agencies could improve access to treatment, but studies are needed to determine safety and efficacy of this approach.

Poor access to buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) may contribute to illicit buprenorphine use. This study investigated illicit buprenorphine use and barriers to BMT among syringe exchange participants. Computer-based interviews conducted at a New York City harm reduction agency determined: prior buprenorphine use; barriers to BMT; and interest in BMT. Of 102 opioid users, 57 had used illicit buprenorphine and 32 had used prescribed buprenorphine. When illicit buprenorphine users were compared to non-users: barriers to BMT (“did not know where to get treatment”) were more common (64% vs. 36%, p < 0.01); mean levels of interest in BMT were greater (3.37 ± 1.29 vs. 2.80 ± 1.34, p = 0.03); and more participants reported themselves likely to initiate treatment (82% vs. 50%, p < 0.01). Illicit buprenorphine users were interested in BMT but did not know where to go for treatment. Addressing barriers to BMT could reduce illicit buprenorphine use.