Non-prescription syringe sales in California: a qualitative examination of practices among 12 local health jurisdictions

Improved syringe disposal practices associated with unsanctioned safe consumption site use: A cohort study of people who inject drugs in the United States

BACKGROUND

Community opposition to safe consumption sites often centers around improper syringe disposal. People are concerned these sites might attract people who inject drugs to the neighborhood, which might in turn lead to more used syringes left in public settings.

METHODS

We evaluated an unsanctioned safe consumption site in an undisclosed United States city in 2018-2020 to assess whether use of the site was associated with improper syringe disposal practices. We recruited people who inject drugs (N=494) using targeted sampling methods, and interviewed participants at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. We employed a quasi-experimental design involving inverse probability of treatment weighting using propensity scores. We used generalized estimating equations and Poisson models to calculate relative risk and incidence rate ratios of improper syringe disposal.

RESULTS

The risk of any improper syringe disposal was comparable among people who used and did not use the unsanctioned safe consumption site in prior 30 days (relative risk 1.03; 95% confidence interval=0.53, 1.17). The rate of improperly disposed syringes per number of injections in prior 30 days was significantly lower among people who had used the unsanctioned safe consumption site during the same period (incident rate ratio 0.42; 95% confidence interval=0.18, 0.88).

CONCLUSION

When people used this unsanctioned safe consumption site, they disposed of significantly fewer syringes in public places, including streets, sidewalks, parks, or parking lots, than people not using the site. This study helps allay concerns that implementing safe consumption sites in the US would lead to increases in improperly disposed syringes.

Syringe access and health harms: Characterizing "landscapes of antagonism" in California's Central Valley

BACKGROUND

Sterile syringe access reduces injection-related health harms, yet access in the U.S. remains grossly inadequate. In California, syringe services programs (SSPs) are authorized mainly at the local level, and many communities remain underserved. State law also allows, but does not require, non-prescription syringe sales at pharmacies, but participation is low. We draw on the theoretical concept of "landscapes of antagonism" to examine how discordance between state and local decision-making contributes to uneven syringe access and health harms in California's Central Valley, where injection rates are high.

METHODS

Our study took place in Fresno and Kern counties. We draw on participant observation and qualitative interviews with individuals who inject drugs and key informants to examine issues around syringe access.

RESULTS

Overall, 8 key informants represented harm reduction, medical, and faith-based organizations. Among 46 people who inject drugs, mean age was 39 (range: 20-65), 37% were female, and 37% self-identified as Latino. About half of individuals at each site had ever successfully purchased from pharmacies, but limited locations and perceived judgement from pharmacy staff posed common barriers. There was no SSP in Kern County due to political opposition; Fresno's SSP has been run by volunteers for more than 20 years despite opposition, and recently gained authorization. Reflecting this disparity, all but two individuals in Fresno accessed syringes from the SSP, whereas only one person in Kern had ever been to an SSP. To fill gaps in access in both sites, individuals obtained syringes that were often already used from diabetics, friends, and people on the street, sharing and reusing syringes at dangerously high rates.

CONCLUSION

Landscapes of antagonism create syringe access inequities that threaten to exacerbate disease transmission and other health harms. Our study raises questions about accountability for the health of people who use drugs and suggests a need for political action.

Nonprescription syringe sales: Resistant pharmacists' attitudes and practices

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.

Pharmacy nonprescription syringe distribution and HIV/AIDS: a review

OBJECTIVE

To summarize current research findings on pharmacy nonprescription syringe distribution to prevent the spread of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) among injection drug users (IDUs), including research on pharmacist attitudes and behavior, drug user attitudes and behavior, and the health impact on HIV/AIDS risk behavior.

DATA SOURCES

Data were collected using PubMed and PsycINFO through July 2011. Search terms used were pharmacist or pharmacy and syringe or syringe exchange or needle or needle exchange. Two journals (Journal of Urban Health and Journal of the American Pharmacists Association) with a high number of hits were manually inspected. Reference sections for each article also were examined.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were included if they examined attitudes toward, experiences with, or the impact of pharmacy nonprescription syringe distribution for the purpose of preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS among IDUs in the United States. Studies were excluded that mentioned these topics in passing or did not report empirical results.

DATA SYNTHESIS

47 studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Studies included a diverse range of perspectives, including pharmacist viewpoints, IDU attitudes, and evaluations.

CONCLUSION

According to the available literature, many pharmacists express willingness to sell and report selling syringes to customers without a prescription. IDUs show willingness to use pharmacies to obtain syringes. Finally, pharmacy syringe sale and the legalization of this practice appear to have a positive impact on HIV risk behavior. Accordingly, the nonprescription sale of syringe should be promoted. However, the literature remains incomplete and future research is required.

Primary and secondary analysis of local elected officials' decisions to support or oppose pharmacy sale of syringes in California

Under California law, local governments may authorize pharmacies within their jurisdictions to sell ten or fewer syringes to an adult without prescription, proof of identity, or proof of medical need. Local governments may simultaneously exempt adults from prosecution for violation of state drug paraphernalia codes for possession of ten or fewer syringes for personal use. Both of these provisions are temporary and sunset on December 31, 2010, unless subsequent state legislation amends that date. The objective of our study was to ascertain how and why local policymakers made their decisions regarding non-prescription syringe sale (NPSS). We examined influences on their decisions, including specific messengers and the arguments that were most salient to their decision making. We selected jurisdictions that were geographically representative of California counties; those with and without syringe exchange programs, and those that had passed or rejected NPSS. We conducted nine semi-structured interviews in five jurisdictions. To enrich primary data collection, we analyzed secondary data by reviewing audio, video, and written transcripts of public hearings and newspaper coverage in five jurisdictions, including three jurisdictions without primary interview data. Among proponents of NPSS, we identified common themes, including: (1) public health research provided conclusive evidence for reduction in HIV and hepatitis transmission without problems of crime, drug use, or unsafe discard of syringes; (2) the local health officer was the key to influencing local policymakers; (3) recall of prior debates over syringe exchange served to inform their decision making; and (4) a lack of local opposition or controversy. Common concerns among opponents of NPSS included: (1) that there would be an increase in unsafe discard of syringes; (2) loss of an important law enforcement tool; (3) that drug users were incapable of desired behavior change; and (4) that research was inconclusive, or proved that syringe access would not work in reducing rates of disease. Themes held in common by proponents and opponents of NPSS were identified as well. Syringe access through NPSS is in fact supported by a robust body of public health research and is considered an important component of a comprehensive strategy to reduce HIV and hepatitis transmission. Our study highlights the importance of understanding the perspectives of elected officials in order to ameliorate their concerns without undermining the public health goal of reducing death, disease, and suffering in at-risk communities.