Recent incarceration and risk of first-time injection initiation assistance: A prospective cohort study of persons who inject drugs

Emerging models of de facto drug policy reforms in the United States

BACKGROUND

Health and human rights organizations have endorsed drug decriminalization to promote public health-oriented approaches to substance use. In the US, policymakers have begun to pursue this via prosecutorial discretion-or the decision by a prosecutor to decline criminal charges for drug possession in their jurisdiction. This study characterizes drivers of adoption, policy design and implementation processes, and barriers to impact and sustainability of this approach to inform evolving policy efforts promoting the health of people who use drugs (PWUD).

METHODS

We conducted n=22 key informant interviews with policymakers and national policy experts representing 13 jurisdictions implementing de facto drug policy reforms. Analyses were informed by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment (EPIS) framework and analyzed using a hybrid inductive-deductive approach.

RESULTS

Drivers of policy adoption included racial inequities, perceived failures of criminalization, and desires to prioritize violent crime given resource constraints. Three distinct policy typologies are described with varying conditions for eligibility, linkage to services, and policy transparency and dissemination. Public misinformation, police resistance and political opposition were seen as threats to sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS

Given evidence that criminalization amplifies drug-related harms, many policymakers are adopting de facto drug policy reforms in the absence of formal legislation. This is the first study to systematically describe relevant implementation processes and emerging policy models. Findings have implications for designing rigorous evaluations on health outcomes and informing sustainable evidence-based policies to promote health and racial equity of PWUD in the US.

First-line opioid agonist treatment as prevention against assisting others in initiating injection drug use: A longitudinal cohort study of people who inject drugs in Vancouver, Canada

Background

Among people who inject drugs, frequent injecting and experiencing withdrawal are associated with facilitating others' first injections. As these factors may reflect an underlying substance use disorder, we investigated whether first-line oral opioid agonist treatment (OAT; methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone) reduces the likelihood that people who inject drugs help others initiate injecting.

Methods

We used questionnaire data from semi-annual visits between December 2014-May 2018 on 334 people who inject drugs with frequent non-medical opioid use in Vancouver, Canada. We estimated the effect of current first-line OAT on subsequent injection initiation assistance provision (i.e., helped someone initiate injecting in the following six months) using inverse-probability-weighted estimation of repeated measures marginal structural models to reduce confounding and informative censoring by time-fixed and time-varying covariates.

Results

By follow-up visit, 54-64% of participants reported current first-line OAT whereas 3.4-6.9% provided subsequent injection initiation assistance. Per the primary weighted estimate (n = 1114 person-visits), participants currently on first-line OAT (versus no OAT) were 50% less likely, on average, to subsequently help someone initiate injecting (relative risk [RR]=0.50, 95% CI=0.23-1.11). First-line OAT was associated with reduced risk of subsequent injection initiation assistance provision in participants who, at baseline, injected opioids less than daily (RR=0.15, 95% CI=0.05-0.44) but not in those who injected opioids daily (RR=0.86, 95% CI=0.35-2.11).

Conclusions

First-line OAT seemingly reduces the short-term likelihood that people who inject drugs facilitate first injections. However, the extent of this potential effect remains uncertain due to imprecise estimation and observed heterogeneity by baseline opioid injecting frequency.

Validation of Self-reported Opioid Agonist Treatment Among People Who Inject Drugs Using Prescription Dispensation Records

BACKGROUND

Studies of people who inject drugs (PWID) commonly use questionnaires to determine whether participants are currently, or have recently been, on opioid agonist treatment for opioid use disorder. However, these previously unvalidated self-reported treatment measures may be susceptible to inaccurate reporting.

METHODS

We linked baseline questionnaire data from 521 PWID in the Ontario integrated Supervised Injection Services cohort in Toronto (November 2018-March 2020) with record-level health administrative data. We assessed the validity (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value [PPV and NPV]) of self-reported recent (in the past 6 months) and current (as of interview) opioid agonist treatment with methadone or buprenorphine-naloxone relative to prescription dispensation records from a provincial narcotics monitoring system, considered the reference standard.

RESULTS

For self-reported recent opioid agonist treatment, sensitivity was 78% (95% CI = 72, 83), specificity was 90% (95% CI = 86, 94), PPV was 90% (95% CI = 85, 93), and NPV was 79% (95% CI = 74, 84). For self-reported current opioid agonist treatment, sensitivity was 84% (95% CI = 78, 90), specificity was 87% (95% CI = 83, 91), PPV was 74% (95% CI = 67, 81), and NPV was 93% (95% CI = 89, 95).

CONCLUSIONS

Self-reported opioid agonist treatment measures were fairly accurate among PWID, with some exceptions. Inaccurate recall due to a lengthy lookback window may explain underreporting of recent treatment, whereas social desirability bias may have led to overreporting of current treatment. These validation data could be used in future studies of PWID to adjust for misclassification in similar self-reported treatment measures.

Factors Associated with Likelihood of Initiating Others into Injection Drug Use Among People Who Inject Drugs in West Virginia

People who inject drugs (PWID) play a critical role in injection-naïve individuals transitioning to injection drug use. We investigated factors associated with future likelihood of initiating injection-naïve individuals using multivariable logistic regression among 418 PWID in rural Appalachia (Cabell County, West Virginia). Less than 10% reported they were likely to initiate someone in the future. Acquiring syringes from a syringe services program was associated with decreased odds of being likely to initiate someone in the future (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.46, 95% CI 0.23, 0.95), while having previously initiated someone into injection drug use was associated with increased odds (aOR 8.65, 95% CI 4.07, 18.41). Among our sample of PWID in Appalachia, a small proportion reported that they would be likely to initiate an injection-naïve individual in the future. Efforts to reduce injection initiation assistance should focus on this subpopulation of PWID who indicate a willingness to engage in this behavior.

Involvement of people who inject drugs in injection initiation events: a cross-sectional analysis identifying similarities and differences across three North American settings

OBJECTIVES

People who inject drugs (PWID) play an integral role in facilitating the entry of others into injection drug use (IDU). We sought to assess factors influencing PWID in providing IDU initiation assistance across three distinct North American settings and to generate pooled measures of risk.

DESIGN

We employed data from three PWID cohort studies participating in PReventing Injecting by Modifying Existing Responses (PRIMER), for this cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING

Tijuana, Mexico; San Diego, USA; Vancouver, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 2944 participants were included in this study (Tijuana: n=766, San Diego: n=353, Vancouver: n=1825).

MEASUREMENTS

The outcome was defined as recently (ie, past 6 months) assisting in an IDU initiation event. Independent variables of interest were identified from previous PRIMER analyses. Site-specific multiple modified Poisson regressions were fit. Pooled relative risks (pRR) were calculated and heterogeneity across sites was assessed via linear random effects models.

RESULTS

Evidence across all three sites indicated that having a history of providing IDU initiation assistance (pRR: 4.83, 95% CI: 3.49 to 6.66) and recently being stopped by law enforcement (pRR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.07) were associated with a higher risk of providing assistance with IDU initiation; while recent opioid agonist treatment (OAT) enrolment (pRR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.96) and no recent IDU (pRR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.64) were associated with a lower risk. We identified substantial differences across site in the association of age (I²: 52%), recent housing insecurity (I²: 39%) and recent non-injection heroin use (I²: 78%).

CONCLUSION

We identified common and site-specific factors related to PWID's risk of assisting in IDU initiation events. Individuals reporting a history of assisting IDU initiations, being recently stopped by law enforcement, and recently injecting methamphetamine/speedball were more likely to have recently assisted an IDU initiation. Whereas those who reported not recently engaging in IDU and those recently enrolled in OAT were less likely to have done so. Interventions and harm reduction strategies aimed at reducing the harms of IDU should incorporate context-specific approaches to reduce the initiation of IDU.