Prescribing Syringes to People Who Inject Drugs: Advancing Harm Reduction in Primary Care

Primary Care Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Safer Use Strategies for Opioids and/or Stimulants: A Mixed-Method Study

INTRODUCTION

Safer use strategies (SUS) are behaviors before, during, and after drug use to moderate use and/or mitigate unwanted consequences. As treatment of substance use disorders becomes more common in primary care, offering SUS in primary care merits exploration.

METHOD

We explored acceptability and use of SUS in primary care using a convergent parallel mixed-method design consisting of patient and clinician semi-structured interviews and surveys. Participants were recruited from primary care clinics involved in a multi-state practice research network. Patients with lifetime stimulant and/or opioid and any SUS use were eligible. All clinicians were eligible. Qualitative data were analyzed using a rapid assessment procedure. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

Participants included patients (n = 10) and clinicians (n = 12) from multiple disciplines. More than half of patients indicated that every SUS surveyed should be offered in primary care. Patients reported using multiple SUS to stay safer, reduce consequences, and limit use. Clinicians reported that offering SUS to primary care patients is acceptable and supported SUS use by sharing informational resources (e.g., safer injection practices) and tangible resources (e.g., naloxone, medication for opioid use disorder [MOUD]). Some strategies recommended by patients were not currently being systematically offered (e.g., fentanyl test strips). Several clinicians expressed willingness to discuss SUS with patients but wanted more training and resources to facilitate SUS discussions to support patient goals.

CONCLUSION

Offering SUS to primary care patients is acceptable to patients and clinicians. Clinicians supported some SUS use, though more SUS and harm reduction training and resources were desired. Providing SUS to patients who use stimulants and/or opioids could enhance patient-centered primary care, especially in clinics offering MOUD. More research is needed to optimize SUS support in primary care settings.

Attitudes Toward Injection Practices Among People Who Inject Drugs Utilizing Medical Services: Opportunities for Harm Reduction Counseling in Health Care Settings

Hospitals are an important setting to provide harm reduction services to people who inject drugs (PWID). This study aimed to characterize PWID's injection practices, the perceived risk and benefits of those practices, and the immediate IDU risk environment among individuals seeking medical care. Surveys were administered to 120 PWID seeking medical services at an urban hospital. Poisson regression was used to examine the effect of perceived risk or importance of injection practices on the rate of engaging in those practices. The mean participant reported "often" reusing syringes and "occasionally" cleaning their hands or skin prior to injection. 78% of participants reported that syringes were extremely risky to share, which was associated with lower likelihood of sharing them (ARR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.36-0.95). 38% of participants reported it was extremely important to use a new syringe for each injection, and these participants were more likely to report never reusing syringes >5 times (ARR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.11-2.35). Other factors that may influence injection practices-including fear of arrest, withdrawal, lack of access to supplies, and injecting outdoors-were common among participants. In conclusion, practices that place PWID at risk of injury and infection are common, and risk-benefit perception is associated with some, but not all, injection practices. Injecting in challenging environments and conditions is common. Therefore, harm reduction counseling in medical settings must be accompanied by other strategies to reduce risk, including facilitating access to supplies. Ultimately, structural interventions, such as affordable housing, are needed to address the risk environment.

Development of a brief stigma and perceptions questionnaire for pharmacists: An exploratory factor analysis approach in New York state counties enrolled in the healing communities study

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about how pharmacists' attitudes and stigma toward naloxone and Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) influence effective linkage to treatment. We examine the psychometrics of a new Pharmacist Opioid Use Disorder Perceptions Questionnaire (P-OUDP-Q), a multidimensional measure to examine pharmacists' stigma and perceptions related to MOUD in the New York State (NYS) site of the HEALing Communities Study.

METHODS

The study recruited a sample of 324 pharmacists from 16 counties in NYS between January and June 2022. A 74-item questionnaire assessed pharmacists' familiarity with opioid-related medications, protocols, policies and attitudes regarding their role, confidence, and beliefs centered around delivery of MOUD and naloxone in the community. Exploratory factor analysis assessed individual and community-level factors associated with four underlying constructs. Factor scores were compared across the demographic predictors. Variables factor loadings <0.4 were eliminated from the factor analysis and the process was reiterated.

RESULTS

Eighty-six percent (n = 280) of the pharmacists were white. A little over half, 57 % (n = 186), were female, 35 % (n = 113) were 30-35 years old. The mean number of years practicing (SD) was 18 (SD: 13). Exploratory factor analysis identified four underlying constructs: (1) practice confidence, (2) practice familiarity, (3) practice attitudes, and (4) methadone attitudes. Statistically significant (p < .05) mean factor scale score differences by race were observed for practice familiarity (white reporting higher than non-white); by pharmacy size for practice familiarity (across all groups; non-significant Tukey post-hoc) and practice attitudes (hospital/clinic greater than big chain pharmacies); by gender (males greater than females) for practice familiarity and methadone attitudes; by poverty quartile for practice attitudes (lowest less than highest quartile); and urban versus rural pharmacist county setting for practice familiarity (rural greater than urban).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings show the P-OUDP-Q is a concise measure of pharmacists' perceptions of their role in dispensing MOUD and naloxone, including distinct "stigma" dimensions, which is valuable for use with pharmacists in communities highly impacted by the opioid epidemic. The development and validation of a reliable measure to assess pharmacists' perceptions of stigma and barriers represents a valuable contribution to the field, to inform the design/implementation of targeted interventions and support systems.

Pharmacy barriers for transgender and gender diverse young adults

BACKGROUND

Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals face substantial physical and mental health care barriers. Community pharmacies are one of the most accessible health care settings; however, concern for discrimination at the pharmacy has been reported. It is important to gain a better understanding of TGD individual's perspectives and experiences at the pharmacy to ensure optimal and inclusive care.

OBJECTIVE

To identify TGD individual experiences and barriers at the pharmacy.

METHODS

This institutional review board-approved qualitative study recruited TGD young adults in the United States between ages 18 and 29 years for semi-structured focus group discussions. Questions focused on barriers to obtaining medications at the pharmacy and negative or positive experiences with pharmacists. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and transcripts were analyzed for common themes amongst participants.

RESULTS

Nine 1.5- to 2-hour focus groups were conducted and included 30 participants (2-6 participants in each group). All participants reported having been prescribed medications by a physician or mental health provider. Participants self-reported issues at pharmacies and with pharmacy personnel. Major themes included issues accessing medications and supplies (needles, syringes), questioning of prescription validity and patient identity, and lack of education or understanding of TGD individuals by pharmacy staff.

CONCLUSION

TGD individuals experience barriers at the pharmacy and concerning issues with pharmacy staff. Education, structural competency, and improvements in gender-related data management are necessary for pharmacists and pharmacy staff to provide equitable and inclusive care for TGD individuals.

Policies, adaptations, and ongoing challenges to naloxone, buprenorphine and nonprescription syringe access across four-states: Findings from an environmental scan and key informant interviews

Background

As the US opioid-involved morbidity and mortality increase, uptake and implementation of evidence-based interventions remain key policy responses. Respond to Prevent was a multi-component, randomized trial implemented in four states and two large pharmacy chains with the aim of improving the pharmacy's capacity to provide naloxone, dispense buprenorphine, and sell nonprescription syringes (NPS). We sought to provide context and assess how policies and organizational practices affect communities and pharmacies across the study states.

Methods

Using a multi-method approach we: 1) conducted an environmental scan of published literature and online materials spanning January 2015 to June 2021, 2) created timelines of key events pertaining to those policies and practices and 3) conducted semi-structured interviews with stakeholders (key informants) at the state and local levels (N=36) to provide further context for the policies and practices we discovered.

Results

Key informants discussed state policies, pharmacy policies and local practices that facilitated access to naloxone, buprenorphine and NPSs. Interviewees from all states spoke about the impact of naloxone standing orders, active partnerships with community-based harm reduction organizations, and some federal and state policies like Medicaid coverage for naloxone and buprenorphine, and buprenorphine telehealth permissions as key facilitators. They also discussed patient stigma, access in rural settings, and high cost of medications as barriers.

Conclusion

Findings underscore the important role harm reduction-related policies play in boosting and institutionalizing interventions in communities and pharmacies while also identifying structural barriers where more focused state and local attention is needed.

Implementing harm reduction kits in an office-based addiction treatment program

BACKGROUND

The rising rates of drug use-related complications call for a paradigm shift in the care for people who use drugs. While addiction treatment and harm reduction have historically been siloed in the US, co-location of these services in office-based addiction treatment (OBAT) settings offers a more realistic and patient-centered approach. We describe a quality improvement program on integrating harm reduction kits into an urban OBAT clinic.

METHODS

After engaging appropriate stakeholders and delivering clinician and staff trainings on safer use best practices, we developed a clinical workflow for universal offering and distribution of pre-packaged kits coupled with patient-facing educational handouts. We assessed: (1) kit uptake with kit number and types distributed; and (2) implementation outcomes of feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, and patient perceptions.

RESULTS

One-month post-implementation, 28% (40/141) of completed in-person visits had at least one kit request, and a total of 121 kits were distributed. Staff and clinicians found the program to be highly feasible, acceptable, and appropriate, and patient perceptions were positive.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating kits in OBAT settings is an important step toward increasing patient access and utilization of life-saving services. Our program uncovered a significant unmet need among our patients, suggesting that kit integration within addiction treatment can improve the standard of care for people who use drugs.