National consensus statement on opioid agonist treatment in custodial settings

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use and dependence are prevalent among incarcerated people, contributing to elevated rates of overdose and other harms in this population. Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) has been shown to be an effective intervention to mitigate these risks. However, challenges to health care implementation in the custodial sector result in suboptimal and variable access to OAT in prisons nationally.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

Among a national multidisciplinary expert panel, we conducted a modified Delphi study that yielded 19 recommendations to government, relevant health authorities and custodial health services. These recommendations cover five core domains: induction or continuation of OAT, OAT options and administration, transition of care to the community, special populations, and organisational support. Key recommendations include prompt recognition and treatment of opioid withdrawal, active linkage to community-based OAT providers upon release, and ensuring appropriate organisational support through local protocols, adequate funding, and monitoring of key program indicators.

CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THIS STATEMENT

This consensus statement addresses a significant gap in national policy on OAT in Australian prisons. The recommendations, finalised in July 2024, set forth best practice standards grounded in evidence and expert consensus. We expect that implementing these recommendations will enhance the quality, consistency and continuity of OAT both within prison and upon release. Optimising OAT provision is crucial for improving health outcomes and addressing the risk of overdose, which is the leading cause of death among people released from prison.

Opioid-related harms and experiences of care among people in justice settings in New South Wales, Australia: evidence from the National Ambulance Surveillance System

BACKGROUND

People in justice settings experience higher rates of psychiatric morbidity, including alcohol and drug use disorders, compared with the general population. However, our understanding of opioid-related harms in justice settings is limited. This study used ambulance data to examine opioid-related harms and experiences of care in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, during periods of incarceration or detention.

METHODS

This mixed-methods study used data from the National Ambulance Surveillance System (NASS) for patients aged 18 and older with an opioid-related ambulance attendance between December 2020 and April 2023. People in justice settings were identified using ambulance billing codes and manual review of paramedic case notes. Descriptive statistics described the patterns and modalities of opioid-related harms in justice settings, and a qualitative thematic analysis of paramedic case notes was used to contextualise findings. Results Over the study period, 328 opioid-related ambulance attendances for people in justice settings were identified (51% heroin; 41% opioid agonist therapy (OAT) medication). Symptoms of opioid withdrawal were noted in 35% of attendances, most commonly for heroin (51%) and withdrawal from OAT medications (48%). Three interconnected themes were identified using qualitative analysis: trust and mistrust in justice settings, systemic barriers to providing OAT, and other harm reduction strategies, and experiences of withdrawal in justice settings.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated the utility of ambulance data in identifying opioid-related harms for people in justice settings in NSW. Qualitative findings highlight current barriers to effective opioid care in justice settings and identify opportunities for intervention, including targeted harm reduction programs, as well as policies that promote continuity of care particularly during transitions in and out of justice settings.

"We don't even know where it's kept": exploring perspectives on naloxone administration by provincial correctional workers in Manitoba, Canada

PURPOSE

Prisonersare at disproportionate risk of suffering substance-related harms. The administration of naloxone is essential to reversing opioid overdose and minimizing substance-related harms in prison and the community. The purpose of this study is to examine how naloxone administration is practiced and perceived in prison settings.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The authors conducted surveys with correctional workers in Manitoba, Canada (n = 257) to examine how they understand and feel about the need for and practice of administering naloxone in their everyday work with criminalized populations.

FINDINGS

Respondents reported feeling a great need to administer naloxone, but most did not feel adequately trained to administer naloxone, creating the perception that criminalized populations remain at enhanced risk.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

Findings provide emerging evidence of the need for training and accompanying policies and procedures for correctional workers on how to access and administer naloxone.

Monitoring medication and illicit drug consumption in a prison by wastewater-based epidemiology: Impact of COVID-19 restrictions

Drug consumption in prisons is a concern for the safety of incarcerated people and staff. Typically, drug use prevalence in prisons is estimated through urinalysis and intelligence operations, which can be intrusive and stressful. An alternative approach, wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE), was used in this study to estimate the consumption of licit and illicit drugs for the entire population of a prison in Australia. Wastewater samples were collected from March to December 2020, covering periods of no restrictions and periods when prison access was restricted to prevent the transmission of COVID-19. Target biomarkers were analysed by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The average consumption of common illicit drugs (MDMA, methamphetamine and cocaine) over the sampling period in the prison (0.5 - 4.5 mg/1000 people/day) was two to three orders of magnitude lower than in the community population (254 - 1000 mg/1000 people/day). Comparison of WBE estimates against pharmacy dispensing data suggested potential illicit buprenorphine consumption at the prison. Methamphetamine and buprenorphine use decreased when no visitors were allowed (18% - 72% decrease for methamphetamine; about half decrease for buprenorphine) and increased once these restrictions were eased (22% - 39% increase for methamphetamine; 44% - 67% increase for buprenorphine). The changes in drug use may be attributed in part to a reduction of drug trafficking into the prison from visitors or non-essential staffs and in part to the reduced contribution of urine from staff who used toilets within the prison. This study provided useful information on the scale of illicit drug use and extra-medical use of licit drugs in prison, and its changes under different security conditions.

Perceived access to opioid agonist treatment in prison among people with a history of injection drug use: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is associated with a reduced likelihood of hepatitis C incidence, nonfatal overdose, and (re)incarceration among people who inject drugs (PWID), yet factors underpinning decisions to access OAT in prison and postrelease are not well understood. The aim of the qualitative study was to explore the perspectives of OAT access while in prison among PWID recently released from prison in Australia.

METHODS

Eligible participants enrolled in the SuperMix cohort (n = 1303) were invited to take part in a semi-structured interview in Victoria, Australia. Inclusion criteria were informed consent, aged ≥18 years, history of injection drug use, incarcerated for ≥3 months, and released from custody <12 months. The study team analysed data via a candidacy framework to account for macro-structural influences.

RESULTS

Among 48 participants (33 male; ten Aboriginal), most injected drugs in the prior month (n = 41), with heroin most frequently injected (n = 33) and nearly half (n = 23) were currently on OAT (primarily methadone). Most participants described the navigation and permeability of OAT services in prison as convoluted. If not on OAT pre-entry, prison policies often restricted access, leaving participants to withdraw in cells. In turn, some participants commenced OAT postrelease to ensure OAT continuity of care if reincarcerated. Other participants who experienced delayed access to OAT in prison stated no need to initiate while in prison or postrelease as they were now "clean". Last, implementation of OAT delivery in prison (e.g., lack of confidentiality) frequently led to changes in OAT type to avoid peer violence (pressure to divert OAT).

CONCLUSION

Findings draw attention to simplistic notions of OAT accessibility in prisons, illuminating how structural determinants influence choice in PWID decision-making. Suboptimal access and acceptability of OAT delivery in prisons will continue to place PWID at risk of harm postrelease (e.g., overdose).

Health and correctional staff acceptability of depot buprenorphine in NSW prisons

BACKGROUND

Provision of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) in custodial settings is resource-intensive and may be associated with diversion, non-medical use, and violence. A clinical trial of a new OAT, depot buprenorphine (the UNLOC-T study), provided the opportunity to obtain health and correctional staff perspectives regarding this treatment prior to widespread roll-out.

METHODS

Sixteen focus groups with 52 participants were conducted, including 44 health staff (nurses, nurse practitioners, doctors, and operational staff) and eight correctional staff.

RESULTS

Key challenges to providing OAT identified as potentially being addressed by depot buprenorphine included 1) patient access, 2) OAT program capacity, 3) treatment administration procedures, 4) medication diversion and other safety issues and, 5) impact on other service delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of depot buprenorphine into correctional settings was considered to have the potential to increase safety for patients, improve staff / patient relations and advance patient health outcomes via expanded treatment coverage and efficiencies gained through enhanced health service delivery. Support was almost universal from both correctional and health staff participating in this study. These findings build on emerging research regarding the positive impact of more flexible OAT programs and could be used to engage support for the implementation of depot buprenorphine from staff in other secure settings.

Depot buprenorphine as an opioid agonist therapy in New South Wales correctional centres: a costing model

BACKGROUND

In 2019 daily liquid methadone and sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone were primary opioid agonist treatments for correctional centres in New South Wales, Australia. However, both had significant potential for diversion to other patients, and their daily administration was resource intensive. An alternative treatment in the form of subcutaneous depot buprenorphine became a viable option following a safety trial in 2020 - the UNLOC-T study. Depot preparation demonstrated advantages over current treatments as more difficult to divert and requiring fewer administrations. This paper reports the results of economic modelling of staffing costs in medication administration comparing depot buprenorphine, methadone, and sublingual buprenorphine provision in UNLOC-T trial facilities.

METHODS

The costing study adopted a micro-costing approach involving the synthesis of cost data from the UNLOC-T clinical trial as well as data collected from Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network records. Labour and materials data were collected during site observations and interviews. Costs were calculated from two payer perspectives: a) the New South Wales (state) government which funds custodial and health services; and b) the Australian Commonwealth government, which pays for medications. The analysis compared the monthly-per-patient cost for each of the three medications in trial-site facilities during July 2019. This was followed by simulation of depot buprenorphine implementation across the study population. Costs associated with medical assessment and reviews were excluded.

RESULTS

The monthly-per-patient New South Wales government service costs of depot buprenorphine, methadone and sublingual buprenorphine were: $151, $379 and $1,529 respectively while Commonwealth government medication costs were $434, $80 and $525. The implementation simulation found that service costs of depot buprenorphine declined as patients transitioned from weekly to monthly administration. Costs of treatment using the other medications increased as patient numbers decreased alongside fixed costs. At 12 months, monthly-per-patient service costs for depot buprenorphine, methadone and sublingual buprenorphine-which would be completely phased out by month 13-were $92, $530 and $2,162 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Depot buprenorphine was consistently the least costly of the treatment options. Future modelling could allow for dynamic patient populations and downstream impacts for participants and the state health system.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12618000942257 . Registered 4 June 2018.

Long-acting injectable buprenorphine - 'best practice' opioid agonist therapy for Australian prisoners

OBJECTIVE

To consider opioid agonist therapy in prisons.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the substantial risks of substance misuse by prisoners, long-acting injectable buprenorphine should be adopted as 'best practice' treatment in Australian prison populations.

Treatment of opioid dependence with depot buprenorphine (CAM2038) in custodial settings

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Opioid agonist treatment is effective but resource intensive to administer safely in custodial settings, leading to significant under-treatment of opioid dependence in these settings world-wide. This study assessed the safety of subcutaneous slow-release depot buprenorphine in custody.

DESIGN

Open-label, non-randomized trial.

SETTING

Correctional centres in New South Wales, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-seven men and women, aged ≥ 18 years of various security classifications with a diagnosis of moderate to severe DSM-5 opioid use disorder currently serving a custodial sentence of ≥ 6 months were recruited between November 2018 and July 2019. Patients not in opioid agonist treatment at recruitment commenced depot buprenorphine; patients already stable on oral methadone treatment were recruited to the comparison arm.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Depot buprenorphine (CAM2038 weekly for 4 weeks then monthly) and daily oral methadone.

MEASUREMENTS

Safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) monitoring and physical examinations at every visit. Participants were administered a survey assessing self-reported diversion and substance use at baseline and weeks 4 and 16.

FINDINGS

Retention in depot buprenorphine treatment was 92.3%. Ninety-four per cent of patients reported at least one adverse event, typically mild and transient. No diversion was identified. The prevalence of self-reported non-prescribed opioid use among depot buprenorphine patients decreased significantly between baseline (97%) and week 16 (12%, odds ratio = 0.0035, 95% confidence interval = 0.0007-0.018, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This first study of depot buprenorphine in custodial settings showed treatment retention and outcomes comparable to those observed in community settings and for other opioid agonist treatment used in custodial settings, without increased risk of diversion.

Development and use of a checklist for the implementation of medication for opioid use disorder in jails

Background

In light of short lengths of stay and proximity to communities of release, jails are well-positioned to intervene in opioid use disorder (OUD). However, a number of barriers have resulted in a slow and limited implementation.

Methods

This paper describes the development and testing of a Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) Implementation Checklist developed as part of a Building Bridges project, a two-year planning grant which supported 16 US jail systems as they prepared to implement or expand MOUD services.

Results

Although initially developed to track changes within sites participating in the initiative, participants noted its utility for identifying evidence-based benchmarks through which the successful implementation of MOUDs could be tracked by correctional administrators.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that this checklist can both help guide and illustrate progress toward vital changes facilitated through established processes and supports.

Plain Language Summary

People incarcerated in jails are more likely to have opioid use disorder than the general population. Despite this, jails in the United States (U.S.) often offer limited or no access to Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD). The Building Bridges project was designed to address this gap in 16 U.S. jail systems as they prepared to implement or expand MOUD services. This article addresses the use of a MOUD checklist that was initially designed to help the jails track changes toward evidence-based benchmarks. The findings suggest that this checklist can both help guide and illustrate progress toward vital changes facilitated through established processes and supports.

Medications for opioid use disorder in state prisons: Perspectives of formerly incarcerated persons

Background: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is common among incarcerated persons and risk of overdose and other adverse drug-related consequences is high after release. Recognizing their potential to reduce these risks, some correctional systems are expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD). This study explored the experiences and perspectives of formerly incarcerated individuals on MOUD use while incarcerated and after release. Methods: We interviewed 53 individuals with self-reported OUD who were released from New Jersey state prisons. Interviews explored motivations to use MOUD while incarcerated and after release, and experiences with prison-based MOUD and transition to community-based care. We performed cross-case analysis to examine common and divergent perspectives across participants. Results: A common reason for accepting prerelease MOUD was recognition of its effectiveness in preventing drug use, overdose, and other drug-related consequences. Participants who chose not to use MOUD often were focused on being completely medication-free or saw themselves as having relatively low-risk of substance use after a prolonged period without opioid use. A few participants reported challenges related to prison-based MOUD, including logistical barriers, stigma, and once-daily buprenorphine dosing. Most participants effectively transitioned to community-based care, but challenges included insurance lapses and difficulty locating providers. Conclusions: Many formerly incarcerated persons with OUD recognize the value of MOUD in supporting recovery, but some hold negative views of MOUD or underestimate the likelihood that they will return to drug use. Patient education on risks of post-release overdose, the role of MOUD in mitigating risk, and MOUD options available to them could increase engagement. Participants' generally positive experiences with MOUD support the expansion of correctional MOUD programs.

Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the criminal justice system: Perspectives of individuals recently released from incarceration

Buprenorphine, an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), remains underutilized in many U.S. jails and prisons. However, use of non-prescribed (i.e., diverted) buprenorphine has been reported in these settings. The current study examined non-prescribed buprenorphine use experiences in correctional and community contexts. The study conducted face-to-face interviews with 300 adults with OUD/opioid misuse and recent incarceration, recruited in Baltimore, MD, and New York, NY (n = 150 each). Illicit/non-prescribed opioid use during incarceration was reported by 63% of participants; 39% reported non-prescribed buprenorphine. Non-prescribed buprenorphine was considered the most widely available opioid in jails/prisons in both states (81% reported "very" or "somewhat" easy to get). The average price of non-prescribed buprenorphine in jail/prison was ~10× higher than in the community (p < 0.001). Participants were more likely to endorse getting high/mood alteration as reasons for using non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration, but tended to ascribe therapeutic motives to use in the community (e.g., self-treatment; p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that different individual-level characteristics were associated with history of non-prescribed buprenorphine use during incarceration and in the community. Use of non-prescribed buprenorphine during incarceration was associated with younger age (p = 0.006) and longer incarceration history (p < 0.001), while use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in the community was associated with MD recruitment site (p = 0.001), not being married (p < 0.001), prior buprenorphine treatment experience (p < 0.001), and housing situation (p = 0.01). These findings suggest that different dynamics and demand characteristics underlie the use of non-prescribed buprenorphine in community and incarceration contexts, with implications for efforts to expand OUD treatment in correctional settings.

Punitive discontinuation of opioid agonist therapy during incarceration

PURPOSE

The prevalence of substance use disorders among incarcerated individuals in Canada is substantially higher than in the general population. Many incarcerated individuals with opioid use disorder remain untreated due to inadequate access to opioid agonist therapy (OAT). A considerable proportion of overdose-related deaths in the province of Ontario are individuals who have recently been released from prison. The purpose of this paper is to highlight that discontinuation of OAT as a disciplinary measure remains an active concern within prisons in Canada and places individuals with opioid use disorder at increased risk of relapse and resultant overdose death.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

This case report describes an incarcerated client with opioid use disorder who was initially stable on OAT, but was forcibly tapered off OAT as a disciplinary measure and subsequently relapsed to illicit opioid use while in custody.

FINDINGS

This case calls attention to concerns regarding treatment of opioid use disorder during incarceration, as forcible detoxification from OAT as a disciplinary measure is a highly dangerous practice. The authors discuss concerns regarding diversion and ways in which prison-based OAT programs can be improved to increase their safety and acceptability among correctional staff. Ongoing advocacy is required on the part of health-care workers and policymakers to ensure that individuals are able to appropriately access this life-saving therapy while incarcerated.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first case report to describe forcible tapering of OAT as a disciplinary measure during incarceration. Despite existing evidence emphasizing the significant risk of overdose associated with detoxification from opioids, this case highlights the need for further research into the causes and prevalence of this practice.

Therapy without a prescription: buprenorphine/naloxone diversion and the therapeutic assemblage in Taiwan

Buprenorphine/naloxone (B/N) therapy is a prescription pharmacotherapy for opioid dependence. For certain health service providers, when B/N escapes supervision and diverts into the hands of people for whom it is unintended, it can pose serious risks even if it may still have therapeutic benefits. The line between therapy and diversion is thus a problematic one. By qualitatively analysing archival review and in-depth interviews, this study uses the concept of a therapeutic assemblage to understand the relationships among government, knowledge, and professionals that surround the regulation of B/N in Taiwan. The therapeutic assemblage is characterised by the partitioning of administration, the loose regulation of prescription, the exclusion of addiction treatment from National Health Insurance (NHI), and the materiality and technicality of therapies. These elements contribute to the therapeutic assemblage's different territorial modes as reflected in the substance schedules that allow for diversion. This is the first grounded work in Asia that empirically examines and theoretically explains the diversion of B/N from an assemblage perspective. It suggests establishing new associations by incorporating addiction treatment into NHI. Lastly, it addresses the analytic purchase of the assemblage approach in unveiling and problematising unintended outcomes of an intervention.

Upholding confidentiality in the preparation and distribution of medication in prisons: implementing recommendations of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Confidentiality must be ensured even in the preparation and distribution of medications in detention settings. In this respect, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment found during recent prison visits several instances where prison staff, and at times detainees, dispensed prescribed treatments and supervised their intake. Such a practice compromises medical confidentiality requirements and the establishment of a trusting doctor-patient relationship. To respect medical confidentiality and ensure safety and quality of care, the authors argue that only qualified healthcare personnel should prepare and distribute prescribed medications, all of which require specialized training. They call for robust research that examines the operational barriers and facilitators as well as the respect of human rights related to various approaches to medication preparation, distribution, and intake so that people in detention can access their treatment with safety, confidentiality, autonomy, and dignity.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2017

This paper is the fortieth consecutive installment of the annual anthological review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, summarizing articles published during 2017 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides and receptors as well as effects of opioid/opiate agonists and antagonists. The review is subdivided into the following specific topics: molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors (1), the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia in animals (2) and humans (3), opioid-sensitive and opioid-insensitive effects of nonopioid analgesics (4), opioid peptide and receptor involvement in tolerance and dependence (5), stress and social status (6), learning and memory (7), eating and drinking (8), drug abuse and alcohol (9), sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (10), mental illness and mood (11), seizures and neurologic disorders (12), electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (13), general activity and locomotion (14), gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (15), cardiovascular responses (16), respiration and thermoregulation (17), and immunological responses (18).

An ethical analysis of medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) for persons who are incarcerated

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly prevalent among persons who are incarcerated. Medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD), methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone, is widely used to treat OUD in the community. Despite MOUD's well-documented effectiveness in improving health and social outcomes, its use in American jails and prisons is limited.Several factors are used to justify limited access to MOUD in jails and prisons including: "uncertainty" of MOUD's effectiveness during incarceration, security concerns, risk of overdose from MOUD, lack of resources and institutional infrastructure, and the inability of people with OUD to provide informed consent. Stigma regarding MOUD also likely plays a role. While these factors are relevant to the creation and implementation of addiction treatment policies in incarcerated settings, their ethicality remains underexplored.Using ethical principles of beneficence/non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy, in addition to public health ethics, we evaluate the ethicality of the above list of factors. There is a two-fold ethical imperative to provide MOUD in jails and prisons. Firstly, persons who are incarcerated have the right to evidence-based medical care for OUD. Secondly, because jails and prisons are government institutions, they have an obligation to provide that evidence-based treatment. Additionally, jails and prisons must address the systematic barriers that prevent them from fulfilling that responsibility. According to widely accepted ethical principles, strong evidence supporting the health benefits of MOUD cannot be subordinated to stigma or inaccurate assessments of security, cost, and feasibility. We conclude that making MOUD inaccessible in jails and prisons is ethically impermissible.

The source and diversion of pharmaceutical drugs for non-medical use: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The non-medical use (NMU) of pharmaceutical drugs is an increasing public health concern. This systematic review consolidates current knowledge about how pharmaceutical drugs are obtained for NMU and the processes and people involved in diversion.

METHODS

Peer-reviewed and grey literature databases were searched for empirical studies published between 1996 and 2017 that examined the source or diversion of pharmaceutical opioids, sedatives or stimulants for NMU in countries with reported misuse problems. Pooled prevalence meta-analyses using random effects models were used to estimate the prevalence of medical and non-medical sourcing reported by end-users, and gifting, selling and trading by various populations.

RESULTS

This review synthesizes the findings of 54 cross-sectional studies via meta-analyses, with a remaining 95 studies examined through narrative review. Pharmaceutical drugs are primarily sourced for NMU from friends and family (57%, 95% CI 53%-62%, I² = 98.5, n = 30) and despite perceptions of healthcare professionals to the contrary, illegitimate practices such as doctor shopping are uncommon (7%, 95% CI 6%-10%, I² = 97.4, n = 29). Those at risk of diversion include patients displaying aberrant medication behaviors, people with substance use issues and students in fraternity/sorority environments. Sourcing via dealers is also common (32%, 95% CI 23%-41%, I² = 99.8, n = 25) and particularly so among people who use illicit drugs (47%, 95% CI 35%-60%, I² = 99.1, n = 15). There is little to no organized criminal involvement in the pharmaceutical black market.

CONCLUSION

Pharmaceutical drugs for NMU are primarily sourced by end-users through social networks. Future research should examine how dealers source pharmaceutical drugs.

Longitudinal injecting risk behaviours among people with a history of injecting drug use in an Australian prison setting: The HITS-p study

BACKGROUND

HCV transmission remains high in prisons globally. Understanding injecting risk behaviours in prisons is crucial to effectively develop and implement HCV prevention programs in this setting including treatment as prevention.

METHODS

HITS-p is a cohort study which enrolled people with a history of injecting drug use in prisons in NSW, Australia from 2005 to 2013. Participants completed an interview at enrolment and follow-up visits to determine injecting behaviours. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) and logistic regression methods were used to assess injecting risk behaviours prior to and following prison entry and to investigate injecting risk behaviours in prison.

RESULTS

Overall, 499 participants with a history of injecting drug use were included (median age, 26 years; 65% male). Participants were significantly less likely to inject drugs following incarceration. Among injectors, participants were less likely to inject ≥weekly but more likely to share a needle/syringe. At enrolment, the proportion reporting any injecting, ≥weekly injecting, and needle/syringe sharing in prison was highest among younger individuals. Younger age was associated with both re-initiation and continuation of injecting drug use following prison entry. Among those continuously imprisoned, younger age was associated with increased odds of any injecting, ≥weekly injecting, and sharing a needle/syringe.

CONCLUSIONS

Upon entry to prison, injecting drug use decreased but syringe sharing increased among injectors. Younger individuals are most likely to exhibit high-risk injecting behaviours in prison. These data highlight the need for improved HCV prevention strategies (including improved needle/syringe access and scale up of HCV therapy) for those at increased risk of HCV transmission in prison, including younger individuals.

Impact of a Mandated Change in Buprenorphine Formulation

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the impact of an insurance-mandated change in formulation of buprenorphine/naloxone (BNX) for patients with opioid use disorder treated in a primary care clinic.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted to determine the proportion of patients who were switched back to the previous BNX formulation and rates of aberrant urine drug tests for the 3 months before and 3 months after a mandated change in BNX from the sublingual film to the rapidly dissolving tablet (BNX-RDT). Aberrant urine drug tests were defined as the presence of cocaine, nonprescribed opioids/benzodiazepines, or the absence of buprenorphine.

RESULTS

In all, 186 patients were included in the analysis. At 3 months after the change, 36.0% of patients remained on BNX-RDT at equivalent dose, 9.1% were prescribed a higher dose of BNX-RDT, 52.7% were switched back to their previous formulation after a trial of BNX-RDT, and 2.2% dropped out of care. There was no significant change in the rates of aberrant urine drug tests pre and postchange (36.6% vs 33.7%; P = 0.27) or in any individual component of urine drug testing. Age, sex, and starting dose were not associated with remaining on BNX-RDT at equivalent dose, compared with increasing dose or changing formulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients were dissatisfied with the change in formulation and requested a return to the previous formulation. This change did not appear to impact drug use; however, the flexibility that permitted patients to switch back to their previous BNX formulation likely attenuated the policy's impact.