A chance to stop and breathe: participants' experiences in the North American Opiate Medication Initiative clinical trial

Who receives heroin-assisted treatment? A comparison of patients receiving opioid maintenance treatment in Denmark

BACKGROUND

Since 2010, heroin-assisted treatment (HAT) has been one of the treatment options available to people with opioid use disorder (OUD) in Denmark. This study aimed to characterize HAT patients at treatment start and compare their individual characteristics to those of patients entering traditional opioid maintenance treatment (OMT) with methadone or buprenorphine during the same period.

METHODS

Patients who initiated HAT or OMT with methadone or buprenorphine in Denmark from 2010 to 2018 were included (n=6798). Multiple national registers were linked to compare treatment groups in terms of socio-demographic variables, previous OUD treatment episodes, hospital-based care, and criminal conviction history.

RESULTS

Nearly all HAT patients had a history of methadone treatment (91%) and half had residential treatment experience (48%). In the year previous to admission, HAT patients recorded the highest percentages of non-fatal overdoses (12%) and chronic hepatitis C diagnoses (16%), and the lowest percentages of psychiatric disorders (11%) compared to traditional OMT patients. Criminal convictions were also common: 39% of the HAT group had committed a property crime and 18% a drug-related crime the year before HAT entry. During the study period, an overall reduction in OMT enrollments for each year was recorded. The HAT proportion to the total remained fairly stable (4%-10%), while the buprenorphine proportion increased.

CONCLUSIONS

In Denmark, OMT patients exhibited numerous vulnerabilities at treatment start, and among the patient groups, HAT patients were the most burdened. HAT seems to reach the target group and adhere to formulated eligibility criteria.

Supervised on-site dosing in injectable opioid agonist treatment-considering the patient perspective. Findings from a cross-sectional interview study in two German cities

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is an effective option to support people living with opioid use disorder (OUD) who have not sufficiently benefitted from oral OAT. However, iOAT has been criticised based on theoretical and practical grounds for its dosing policies: Current regulations demand supervised, on-site application and require patients to frequently visit their treatment facility. The current study aims to investigate how patients experience on-site application and derive strategies to enhance the acceptability and effectiveness of iOAT-delivery.

METHODS

This article is based on semi-structured interviews with 27 individuals currently or previously in iOAT in two German outpatient iOAT-clinics. We undertook an inductive qualitative content analysis, which included blinded, independent coding and the analysis of individual cases.

RESULTS

Comments regarding on-site application and daily visits to the clinic were grouped into positive and negative aspects, iOAT as the best alternative option, facilitators of daily visits, and suggestions for improvement. Positive aspects took the factors stability and social support in regard. Negative aspects ranged from general inconveniences to major impediments to individuals' daily lives and towards achieving psychosocial goals. Participants reported rigorous adherence to iOAT's treatment regime, often due to a perceived lack of alternative options. Meeting iOAT's demands was eased by the patients' coping-strategies and through facilitating measures implemented by iOAT-clinics. Despite acknowledgement of the potential detriments from easing regulations, take-home arrangements were frequently suggested by participants to improve iOAT.

CONCLUSIONS

Being required to attend the clinic for supervised iOAT-application is not experienced uniformly. While clinics can support their patients to cope with strict regulations, alternative approaches to iOAT-application should be considered to accommodate patients' individual needs. Examples from other treatment modalities (e.g., remote supervision and delivery services) might aid to reconcile individualisation while providing adequate safety measures and improve iOAT in the long term.

"They Talk to Me Like a Person" Experiences of People in an Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment Program: A Qualitative Interpretive Description

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore client experiences in a community-based injectable opioid agonist therapy (iOAT) program.

STUDY SETTING

The study occurred across two cities in Alberta, Canada.

STUDY DESIGN

The research team conducted secondary interpretive description analysis on qualitative interview transcripts.

DATA COLLECTION

Twenty-three iOAT clients were interviewed as part of a prior quality improvement initiative. Using secondary analysis of the transcripts, interviews were analyzed for themes, to create an understanding of clients' experiences.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Participants accessed iOAT through other health services, for treatment of opioid use disorder. Participants reported that building trusting and supportive relationships with nurses was crucial to their success in the program. Through these relationships, participants experienced stopping and starting. They stopped behaviors such as illicit drug use, having withdrawal symptoms and anxiety, and prohibited income generation activities. They started taking care of themselves, accessing housing, increasing financial stability, receiving primary care, and connecting with friends and family. The global experience of iOAT was one of positive change for participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study are largely consistent with other published examples-iOAT programs create benefits for both clients and their communities. Although clients may join the program to access the hydromorphone, the relationships between staff and clients are the key driver of success.

'This is hardcore': a qualitative study exploring service users' experiences of Heroin-Assisted Treatment (HAT) in Middlesbrough, England

BACKGROUND

Heroin-Assisted Treatment (HAT) is well evidenced internationally to improve health and social outcomes for people dependent on opioids who have not been helped by traditional treatment options. Despite this evidence base, England has been slow to implement HAT. The first service outside of a trial setting opened in 2019, providing twice-daily supervised injections of medical-grade heroin (diamorphine) to a select sample of high-risk heroin users in Middlesbrough. This paper explores their experiences, including the negotiation of the strict regularly controls required of a novel intervention in the UK context.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with service providers and users of the Middlesbrough HAT service between September and November 2021. Data from each group were thematically analysed and reported separately. This paper details the experiences of the twelve heroin dependent men and women accessing HAT.

RESULTS

Participants' accounts of HAT treatment evidenced a tension between the regulatory constraints and uncertainty of treatment provision, and the positive outcomes experienced through supportive service provision and an injectable treatment option. Limited confidence was held in treatment efficacy, longevity of funding, and personal capacity for treatment success. This was counteracted by a strong motivation to cease engagement with the illicit drug market. While attendance requirements placed restrictions on daily activities, participants also experienced benefits from strong, supportive bonds built with the service providers through their continued engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

The Middlesbrough HAT programme provided benefits to a high-risk population of opioid dependent people who were unable or disinclined to participate in conventional opioid substitution treatments. The findings in this paper highlight the potential for service modifications to further enhance engagement. The closure of this programme in 2022 prohibits this opportunity for the Middlesbrough community, but holds potential to inform advocacy and innovation for future HAT interventions in England.

More than just 'free heroin': Caring whilst navigating constraint in the delivery of diamorphine assisted treatment

BACKGROUND

In 2020, drug related deaths in the United Kingdom (UK) reached the highest rate in over 25 years, with hospitalisations and deaths particularly impacting people who use illicit opioids such as heroin. Treatment systems are increasingly required to be innovative to engage the most vulnerable at risk from premature morbidity and mortality. Heroin Assisted Treatment (HAT) is an alternative treatment modality for people for whom more traditional forms of opioid substitution therapy, such as methadone, have been ineffective. Middlesbrough, a town in the North-East England, was home to the first service in the UK to implement HAT outside of a clinical trial setting which closed for operation in November 2022.

METHODS

Qualitative in-depth interviews with patients and health care providers (n =17) involved in the delivery of HAT were undertaken during 2021. This paper focuses on the health care provider interviews, the majority of which took place remotely. Interviews were audio recorded and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Health care providers navigated multiple layers of constraint during HAT implementation and delivery. We explore this in relation to three themes: 1) Negotiating risk and safety within treatment 2) More than a prescription: care beyond diamorphine 3) Internal and external delivery barriers and impact on treatment acceptability, identity and longevity. Negotiating and managing risks of polysubstance use was a complex task. Benefits regarding access to holistic care, improved therapeutic and social relationships were recognised by practitioners. The rigorous delivery schedule was the biggest barrier to engagement. Outside the treatment room, socio-structural factors posed additional challenges.

CONCLUSION

Despite some operational complexities, health care providers viewed HAT as an effective method of engaging a high risk population with drug treatment services, with holistic benefits for clients over and above the treatment of opioid dependency. Findings will inform advocacy and innovation for future HAT interventions in England.

Measuring the preferences of injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) clients: Development of a person-centered scale (best-worst scaling)

BACKGROUND

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is effective for opioid use disorder (OUD), yet little is known about client preferences for accessing iOAT (e.g., with diacetylmorphine, hydromorphone, buprenorphine, fentanyl, etc.). Best-worst scaling (BWS) is a preference elicitation method from health economics that has never been applied to addiction care broadly, or iOAT specifically. We describe the stages of developing a BWS scale that assesses iOAT clients' treatment delivery preferences to inform program planning and maximize healthcare efficiency.

METHODS

We underwent several steps to reveal the relevant attributes/levels and design the scale structure. An initial list of potential attributes and levels was established from a literature review and prior qualitative data. Then, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with clients (n=21) on their iOAT preferences to confirm the attributes and prioritize/include new ones. Next, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with iOAT experts and stakeholders to receive their input on the draft list of attributes and levels. A BWS profile case design was piloted with iOAT clients (n=18) from different sites during a think aloud interview. After several rounds of revisions, the final version was tested by iOAT clients (n=2) before the scale was launched.

RESULTS

We developed a person-centered scale that assesses current and former iOAT clients' most and least wanted aspects of iOAT delivery. The final version yielded 7 unique attributes: choice of medication, choice of dose, convenience, location & space, scheduling & routines, staff & training, and types of services offered.

CONCLUSION

This scale can help expand iOAT programs in a way that is person-centered, rapid, and affordable. The methodology is a guide for other regions with similar populations who aim to develop strong quantitative methodologies that prioritize client collaboration.

Physician Communication in Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment: Collecting Patient Ratings With the Communication Assessment Tool

OBJECTIVE

Patient ratings of physician communication in the setting of daily injectable opioid agonist treatment are reported. Associations between communication items and demographic, health, drug use, and treatment characteristics are explored.

METHODS

Participants (n = 121) were patients receiving treatment for opioid use disorder with hydromorphone (an opioid analgesic) or diacetylmorphine (medical grade heroin). Ratings of physician communication were collected using the 14-item Communication Assessment Tool. Items were dichotomized and associations were explored using univariate and multivariable logistic regression models for each of the 14 items.

RESULTS

Ratings of physician communication were lower than reported in other populations. In nearly all of the 14 multivariable models, participants with more physical health problems and with lower scores for treatment drug liking had lower odds of rating physician communication as excellent.

CONCLUSIONS

In physician interactions with patients with opioid use disorder, there is a critical need to address comorbid physical health problems and account for patient medication preferences.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Findings reinforce the role physicians can play in communicating with patients about their comorbid conditions and about medication preferences. In the patient-physician interaction efforts to meet patients' evolving treatment needs and preferences can be made by offering patients access to all available evidence-based treatments.

Perceptions of injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) among people who regularly use opioids in Australia: findings from a cross-sectional study in three Australian cities

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Not all people experiencing opioid dependence benefit from oral opioid agonist treatment. The aim of this study was to examine perceptions of (supervised) injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) (described as 'an opioid similar to heroin self-injected at a clinic several times a day') among people who regularly use opioids and determine how common iOAT eligibility criteria accord with interest in iOAT.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey SETTING: Sydney, Melbourne and Hobart, Australia PARTICIPANTS: A total of 344 people (63% male) who use opioids regularly and had ever injected opioids, interviewed December 2017-March 2018. The mean age of participants was 41.5 years [standard deviation (SD) = 8.5].

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcome measures were interest in iOAT, factors associated with interest and the proportion of participants who would be eligible using common criteria from trials and guidelines. We examined willingness to travel for iOAT, medication preferences and perspectives on whom should receive iOAT.

FINDINGS

Overall, 53% of participants (n = 182) believed that iOAT would be a good treatment option for them. Participants who believed that iOAT was a good treatment option for them were more likely to be male [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.10-2.82], have used heroin in the past month (aOR = 6.03, 95% CI = 2.86-12.71), currently regularly inject opioids (aOR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.16-2.91) and have met ICD-10 criteria for opioid dependence (aOR = 3.46, 95% CI = 1.65-7.24). Those interested in iOAT had commenced more treatment episodes (aOR =1.06, 95% CI = 1.00-1.12). Among those interested in iOAT (n = 182), 26% (n = 48) met common eligibility criteria for iOAT.

CONCLUSIONS

Interest in injectable opioid agonist treatment does not appear to be universal among people who regularly use opioids. Among study participants who expressed interest in injectable opioid agonist treatment, most did not meet common eligibility criteria.

"It's Helped Me a Lot, Just Like to Stay Alive": a Qualitative Analysis of Outcomes of a Novel Hydromorphone Tablet Distribution Program in Vancouver, Canada

North America is experiencing an overdose crisis driven by fentanyl, related analogues, and fentanyl-adulterated drugs. In response, there have been increased calls for "safe supply" interventions based on the premise that providing a safer alternative (i.e., pharmaceutical drugs of known quality/quantity, non-adulterated, with user agency in consumption methods) to the street drug supply will limit people's use of fentanyl-adulterated drugs and reduce overdose events. This study examined outcomes of a hydromorphone tablet distribution program intended to prevent overdose events among people who use drugs (PWUD) at high risk of fatal overdose. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 42 people enrolled in the hydromorphone distribution program. Additionally, over 100 h of ethnographic observation were undertaken in and around the study site. Transcripts were coded using NVivo and based on categories extracted from the interview guides and those identified during initial interviews and ethnographic fieldwork. Analysis focused on narratives around experiences with the program, focusing on program-related outcomes. Our analysis identified the following positive outcomes of being enrolled in the hydromorphone tablet distribution program: (1) reduced street drug use and overdose risk, (2) improvements to health and well-being, (3) improvements in co-management of pain, and (4) economic improvements. Our findings indicate that the hydromorphone distribution program not only is effective in responding to the current overdose crisis by reducing people's use of illicit drugs but also addresses inequities stemming from the intersection of drug use and social inequality. Safe supply programs should be further implemented and evaluated in both urban and rural setting across North America as a strategy to reduce exposure to the toxic drug supply and fatal overdose.

[Public policies for people who use drugs: Strategies for the elimination of stigma and the promotion of human rights]

This paper aims to provide theoretically informed practical proposals for the improvement of current drug policies, which are based on a biological model of disease and the criminalization of people who use drugs. First, we present alternatives to a biologically-oriented scientific conception centered around neuroscientific postulates, which support the idea that the etiology of addiction materializes in the brain, in favor of models based on the social sciences where context plays a relevant role in the description and management approaches regarding different uses of psychoactive substances. Second, epistemological models and proposals are offered from a practical perspective to sustain or implement policies and programs in accordance with a more sustainable approach based on the elimination of stigma and the promotion of political participation of people who use drugs. In short, drug policies based on human rights.

Longitudinal patterns of cocaine use among patients receiving injectable hydromorphone or diacetylmorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder: A growth curve modeling approach

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cocaine use is prevalent among people receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment. Investigations of cocaine use in this population have been descriptive and the potential heterogeneity existing in patterns of use have not been characterized. As such, among patients receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment, this study aimed to: 1) quantify intra- and inter-individual variation in cocaine use over 24-months and; 2) determine how predictors of interest explained this variation.

METHODS

Participants were patients receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment for opioid use disorder. Study visits were completed at baseline prior to receiving treatment, and 3,6,9,12,18, and 24 months after baseline. A multi-level regression approach to growth curve modeling was employed to estimate and explain intra- (within-person) and inter-individual (between-person) variation in cocaine use.

RESULTS

Significant intra and inter-individual variation in cocaine use was identified over 24-months. Treatment engagement was on average associated with reductions in the prior month number of days of cocaine use (range: 0-30)(Estimate (standard error): -0.05(0.02), p = 0.003). On average, men reported less cocaine use compared to women (Estimate (standard error): -5.91(1.57), p=<0.001), and participants reporting ever regularly using cocaine at baseline reported more cocaine use over 24-months compared to participants reporting never regularly using cocaine (Estimate (standard error): 4.72 (1.91), p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant reductions in cocaine use were observed and significant heterogeneity in patterns of cocaine use was identified. These heterogeneous cocaine use profiles suggest that an individualized approach to care will be critical in responding to patients' cocaine use in injectable opioid agonist treatment.

Motivations to initiate injectable hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine treatment: A qualitative study of patient experiences in Vancouver, Canada

BACKGROUND

Within the context of the ongoing overdose crisis and limitations of conventional opioid treatments, the scale-up of injectable hydromorphone (HDM) and diacetylmorphine (DAM) as evidenced-based treatments is currently underway in some settings in Canada. Past research has underscored the importance of treatment initiation in shaping onward treatment trajectories, however structural factors that influence participants' motivations to access injectable HDM or DAM have not been fully characterized. This study examines peoples' motivations for accessing HDM/DAM treatment and situates these within the social and structural context that shapes treatment delivery by employing the concept of structural vulnerability.

METHODS

Fifty-two individuals enrolled in injectable HDM/DAM programs were recruited from four community-based clinical programs in Vancouver, Canada to participate in qualitative semi-structured interviews. Approximately 50 h of ethnographic fieldwork was also completed in one clinical setting, and one-on-one with participants public spaces. Interview transcripts and ethnographic fieldnotes were analyzed through a structural vulnerability lens with a focus on treatment initiation.

RESULTS

Participants' previous experiences and perceptions of other drug treatments (e.g. methadone) foregrounded their initiation of injectable HDM/DAM. Social and structural factors (e.g. fentanyl-adulterated drug supply, poverty, drug criminalization) influenced participants' motivations to address immediate physical risks and their initial perception of this treatment's ability to align with their opioid use experiences. Similar social and structural factors that drive immediate physical risks, were also evidenced in participants' motivations to make changes in their daily lives and to address broader opioid use goals.

CONCLUSION

Participants descriptions of their motivations to initiate HDM/DAM highlight how structural vulnerabilities shaped participants' experiences initiating injectable HDM/DAM.

Slow release oral morphine versus methadone for opioid use disorder in the fentanyl era (pRESTO): Protocol for a non-inferiority randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

North America is facing an unprecedented public health crisis of opioid-related morbidity and mortality, increasingly as a result of the introduction of illicitly manufactured fentanyl into the street drug market. Although the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) is a key element in the response to the opioid overdose epidemic, currently available pharmacotherapies (e.g., methadone, buprenorphine) may not be acceptable to or effective in all patients. Available evidence suggests that slow-release oral morphine (SROM) has similar efficacy rates as methadone with respect to promoting abstinence, and with improvements in a number of patient-reported outcomes among persons using heroin. However, little is known about the relative effectiveness and acceptability of SROM compared to methadone in the context of fentanyl use. This study aims to address this research gap.

METHODS

pRESTO is a 24-week, open-label, two arm, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial comparing SROM versus methadone for the treatment of OUD. Participants will be 298 clinically stable, non-pregnant adults with OUD, recruited from outpatient clinics in Vancouver, Canada, where the majority of the illicit opioids are contaminated with fentanyl. The primary outcome is suppression of illicit opioid use, measured by bi-weekly urine drug screens. Secondary outcomes include: treatment retention, medication safety, overdose events, treatment satisfaction, psychological functioning, changes in drug-related problems, changes in quality of life, opioid cravings, other substance use, and cost-effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

pRESTO will be among the first studies to evaluate treatment options for individuals primarily using synthetic street opioids, providing important evidence to guide treatment strategies for this population.

Building healthcare provider relationships for patient-centered care: A qualitative study of the experiences of people receiving injectable opioid agonist treatment

Background

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) was designed as a pragmatic and compassionate approach for people who have not benefitted from medication assisted treatment with oral opioids (e.g., methadone). While, a substantial body of clinical trial evidence has demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of iOAT, considerably less is known about the patient-centered aspects of this treatment and their role in self-reported treatment goals and outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore participants’ experiences in iOAT as they broadly relate to the domains of patient-centered care. A secondary goal was to explore how these experiences affected participants’ self-reported treatment outcomes.

Methods

A qualitative methodology, and constructivist grounded theory approach, was used to guide sampling, data collection and analysis. A total of 30 in-depth interviews were conducted with people receiving iOAT in North America’s first clinic. Audio-recordings for each semi-structured interview were transcribed and read repeatedly. The strategy of constant comparison was used through iterative stages of line-by-line, focused and theoretical coding until theoretical saturation was achieved.

Results

“Building healthcare provider relationships for patient-centered care in iOAT” was the emergent core concept. Healthcare provider relationships were established through two interrelated processes: ‘Opening up’ was attributed to the positive environment, and to feeling understood and supported by healthcare providers. ‘Being a part of care’ emerged as participants felt safe to ask for what was needed and had opportunities to collaborate in treatment decisions. These processes established a foundation in which participants experienced care that was responsive to their individual dose, health and psychosocial needs.

Conclusions

The core concept suggested that therapeutic relationships were fundamental to experiences of patient-centered care in iOAT. When relationships were respectful and understanding, participants received individualized and holistic care in iOAT. These findings offer a valuable example of how therapeutic relationships can be strengthened in other substance use treatment settings, particularly when responding to the diverse treatment needs of clients.

Adding quality to quantity in randomized controlled trials of addiction prevention and treatment: a new framework to facilitate the integration of qualitative research

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are important for evaluating interventions, and qualitative research is increasingly recognized as being crucial to the success of this enterprise. We aimed to describe and demonstrate a temporal parallel purpose framework to help researchers understand how to make optimum use of qualitative research before, during and after RCTs. This framework sets out specific rationales for conducting qualitative research at each stage of a trial, where the rationales presented relate to both the intervention and evaluation methodology.

METHOD AND RESULTS

We conducted a scoping review of published qualitative studies undertaken alongside RCTs focusing on illicit drug use. We then used the temporal parallel purpose framework to present key findings to demonstrate how qualitative studies can add value to addiction RCTs by enhancing understanding of the intervention being trialled and/or the RCT itself. In so doing, we highlight the missed opportunities for addiction science when qualitative research is overlooked. We also explain why barriers to combining qualitative research and RCTs are neither inevitable nor insurmountable.

CONCLUSIONS

The temporal parallel purpose framework provides a tool for assessing when and why to combine qualitative research with addiction treatment and prevention RCTs. Our paper and framework can help researchers formulate key questions that qualitative research can address. This can potentially save resources by reducing the number of poorly designed interventions and trials and prevent morbidity, mortality, and other addiction-related harms by facilitating the identification and implementation of interventions that are most likely to be effective.

Patient-centred care for addiction treatment: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Substance use disorders are chronic conditions that require a multidimensional treatment approach. Despite ongoing efforts to diversify such treatments, evidence continues to illuminate modest rates of treatment engagement and perceived barriers to treatment. Patient-centred care (PCC) is one approach that may strengthen the responsiveness of treatments for people with problematic substance use. The aim of this scoping review is to explore how the principles of PCC have been implemented and operationalised in healthcare settings for people with problematic substance use.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This scoping review follows the iterative stages of the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Both empirical (from Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and ISI Web of Science) and grey literature references will be considered if they focused on populations with problematic substance use and described or measured PCC or one of its principles in a health-oriented context. Two reviewers will independently screen references in two successive stages of title/abstract screening and then full-text screening for references meeting title/abstract criteria. A descriptive overview, tabular and/or graphical summaries, and a directed content analysis will be carried out on extracted data. This scoping review has been registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/5swvd/).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review will systematically examine the extent and nature of existing evidence of PCC in addiction research and clinical practice. Such evidence will contribute to the operationalisation of PCC for people with problematic substance use. A multidisciplinary team has been gathered to represent the needs of people with problematic substance use, healthcare providers and decision-makers. The team's knowledge users will be engaged throughout this review and will participate in dissemination activities (eg, workshops, presentations, publications, reports).

How Drug Control Policy and Practice Undermine Access to Controlled Medicines

Drug conventions serve as the cornerstone for domestic drug laws and impose a dual obligation upon states to prevent the misuse of controlled substances while ensuring their adequate availability for medical and scientific purposes. Despite the mandate that these obligations be enforced equally, the dominant paradigm enshrined in the drug conventions is an enforcement-heavy criminal justice response to controlled substances that prohibits and penalizes their misuse. Prioritizing restrictive control is to the detriment of ensuring adequate availability of and access to controlled medicines, thereby violating the rights of people who need them. This paper argues that the drug conventions' prioritization of criminal justice measures-including efforts to prevent non-medical use of controlled substances-undermines access to medicines and infringes upon the right to health and the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress. While the effects of criminalization under drug policy limit the right to health in multiple ways, we draw on research and documented examples to highlight the impact of drug control and criminalization on access to medicines. The prioritization and protection of human rights-specifically the right to health and the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress-are critical to rebalancing drug policy.

Men's and women's response to treatment and perceptions of outcomes in a randomized controlled trial of injectable opioid assisted treatment for severe opioid use disorder

Background

To test whether there are gender differences in treatment outcomes among patients receiving injectable opioids for the treatment of long-term opioid-dependence. The study additionally explores whether men and women have different perceptions of treatment effectiveness.

Methods

This study is a secondary analysis from SALOME, a double-blind, phase III, randomized controlled trial testing the non-inferiorirty of injectable hydromorphone to injectable diacetylmorphine among 202 long-term street opioid injectors in Vancouver (Canada). Given this was a secondary analysis, no a priori power calaculation was conducted. Differences in baseline characteristics and six-month treatment outcomes (illicit heroin use, opioid use, crack cocaine use, non-legal activities, physical and psychological health scores, urine positive for street heroin markers, and retention) were analysed by gender using fitted models. Responses to an open ended question on reasons for treatment effectiveness were explored with a thematic analysis.

Results

Men and women differed significantly on a number of characteristics at baseline. For example, women were significantly younger, presented to treatment with significantly higher rates of prior month sex work (31.5% vs. 0%), and used significantly more crack cocaine (14.71 vs. 8.38 days). After six-months of treatment there were no significant differences in treatment outcomes by gender, after adjusting for baseline values. For both men and women, improved health and quality of life were the most common reasons provided for treatment effectiveness, however women were more specific in the types of health improvements.

Conclusions

Despite presenting to treatment with vulnerabilities not faced to the same extent by men, at six-months women did not differ significantly from men in tested trial efficacy outcomes. While the primary outcome in the trial was the reduction of illicit opioid use, in the open-ended responses both men and women focused their comments on improvement in health and quality of life as reasons for treatment effectiveness. The supervised model of care with injectable medications provides a particularly suitable framework for providing care to opioid-dependent men and women not attracted or retained by other treatments. The absence of statistical differences reported in this secondary analysis may be due to lack of adequate statistical power to detect meaningful effects.

Trial registration

This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01447212) Registered: October 4, 2011 at the following link: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01447212.

Advancing patient-centered care for structurally vulnerable drug-using populations: a qualitative study of the perspectives of people who use drugs regarding the potential integration of harm reduction interventions into hospitals

AIMS

To explore the perspectives of structurally vulnerable people who use drugs (PWUD) regarding: (1) the potential integration of harm reduction interventions (e.g. supervised drug consumption services, opioid-assisted treatment) into hospitals; and (2) the implications of these interventions for patient-centered care, hospital outcomes and drug-related risks and harms.

DESIGN

Semi-structured qualitative interviews.

SETTING

Vancouver, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty structurally vulnerable PWUD who had been discharged from hospital against medical advice within the past 2 years, and hospitalized multiple times over the past 5 years.

MEASUREMENTS

Semi-structured interview guide including questions to elicit perspectives on hospital-based harm reduction interventions.

FINDINGS

Participant accounts highlighted that hospital-based harm reduction interventions would promote patient-centered care by: (1) prioritizing hospital care access and risk reduction over the enforcement of abstinence-based drug policies; (2) increasing responsiveness to subjective health needs (e.g. pain and withdrawal symptoms); and (3) fostering 'culturally safe' care.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital-based harm reduction interventions for people who use drugs, such as supervised drug consumption services and opioid-assisted treatment, can potentially improve hospital care retention, promote patient-centered care and reduce adverse health outcomes among people who use drugs.

The Role of Gender in Factors Associated With Addiction Treatment Satisfaction Among Long-Term Opioid Users

OBJECTIVES

To identify factors associated with Opioid Agonist Treatment (OAT) satisfaction and to determine whether these relationships are gender specific.

METHODS

This study was based on data collected in a cross-sectional study among long-term opioid-dependent individuals (n = 160; 46.3% women). Participants completed the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire in reference to OAT episodes. Sociodemographic, illicit substance use, health, and addiction treatment history data were collected. Multivariable linear regression was used to determine the relationship between these variables and treatment satisfaction. To explore the potential role of gender in these identified relationships stratified multivariable models were tested. Additional open-ended questions regarding positive and negative perceptions of treatment were collected, and a thematic analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

In the multivariable linear regression model, participants who were older, of Aboriginal ancestry, and currently receiving OAT had higher OAT satisfaction scores, whereas participants who had methadone dose preferences of 30 mg or less had lower OAT satisfaction. In stratified analyses among women, the relationship between preferred methadone dose and current OAT remained significantly associated with satisfaction. Open-ended positive and negative perceptions complemented and provided further valuable data to interpret these identified relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study to explore the potential role of gender in factors associated with OAT satisfaction. These findings provide valuable information to health care providers working in OAT settings regarding how to address women and men's OAT needs and improve treatment satisfaction.