Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on enrollment in medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in Vancouver, Canada: An interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: In anticipation of COVID-19 related disruptions to opioid use disorder (OUD) care, new provincial and federal guidance for the management of OUD and risk mitigation guidance (RMG) for prescription of pharmaceutical opioids were introduced in British Columbia, Canada, in March 2020. This study evaluated the combined impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and counteracting OUD policies on enrollment in medications for OUD (MOUD). METHODS: Using data from three cohorts of people with presumed OUD in Vancouver, we conducted an interrupted time series analysis to estimate the combined effects impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and counteracting OUD policies on the prevalence of enrollment in MOUD overall, as well as in individual MOUDs (methadone, buprenorphine/naloxone, slow-release oral morphine) between November 2018 and November 2021, controlling for pre-existing trends. In sub-analysis we considered RMG opioids together with MOUD. RESULTS: We included 760 participants with presumed OUD. In the post-COVID-19 period, MOUD and slow-release oral morphine prevalence rates showed an estimated immediate increase in level (+7.6%, 95% CI: 0.6%, 14.6% and 1.8%, 95% CI: 0.3%, 3.3%, respectively), followed by a decline in the monthly trend (-0.8% per month, 95% CI: -1.4%, -0.2% and -0.2% per month, 95% CI: -0.4, -0.1, respectively). There were no significant changes in the prevalence trends of enrollment in methadone, buprenorphine/naloxone, or when RMG opioids were considered together with MOUD. CONCLUSIONS: Despite immediate improvements in MOUD enrollment in the post-COVID-19 period, this beneficial trend reversed over time. RMG opioids appeared to have provided additional benefits to sustain retention in OUD care.

Inability to contact opioid agonist therapy prescribers during the COVID-19 pandemic in a Canadian setting: a cross-sectional analysis among people on opioid agonist therapy.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and consequent public health response may have undermined key responses to the protracted drug poisoning crisis, including reduced access to opioid agonist therapy (OAT) among people with opioid use disorder. Our study objectives were to estimate the prevalence of and identify factors associated with inability to contact OAT prescribers when in need among people on OAT in a Canadian setting during the dual public health crises. METHODS: Survey data were collected from three prospective cohort studies of community-recruited people who use drugs between July and November 2020, in Vancouver, Canada. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify potential factors associated with inability to contact OAT prescribers among patients who accessed OAT in the past 6 months. RESULTS: Among 448 respondents who reported accessing OAT in the past 6 months, including 231 (54.9%) men, 85 (19.0%) reported having been unable to contact OAT prescribers when needed, whereas 268 (59.8%) reported being able to talk to their prescriber when needed, and 95 (21.2%) reported that they did not want to talk to their medication prescriber in the previous 6 months. Among those who reported inability to contact prescribers, 45 (53.6%) reported that their overall ability to contact prescribers decreased since the start of the pandemic. In multivariable analyses, factors independently associated with inability to talk to OAT prescribers included: chronic pain (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 1.82; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.02, 3.27), moderate to severe symptoms of depression or anxiety (AOR = 4.74; 95% CI 2.30, 9.76), inability to access health/social services (AOR = 2.66; 95% CI 1.41, 5.02), and inability to self-isolate or socially distance most or all of the time (AOR = 2.13; 95% CI 1.10, 4.14). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, approximately one fifth of the sample reported inability to contact their OAT prescribers when needed, and those people were more likely to have co-occurring vulnerabilities (i.e., co-morbidities, inability to access health/social services) and higher vulnerability to COVID-19. Interventions are needed to ensure optimal access to OAT and mitigate the deepening health inequities resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and the escalating drug poisoning crisis.

Supporting Self-isolation for COVID-19 With "Risk Mitigation" Prescribing and Housing Supports for People Who Use Drugs: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Self-isolation is critical in preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. However, people who use drugs face significant barriers in adhering to the regulations. As a response, several supportive measures have been introduced in British Columbia, including temporary housing access and "risk mitigation" prescribing, in which health care providers prescribe pharmaceutical alternatives to the unregulated drug supply to prevent withdrawal and reduce overdose risk. CASE SUMMARY: We present a case of a 39-year-old male with a history of polysubstance use and frequent overdoses, who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and was able to successfully self-isolate. "Risk mitigation" prescribing, supportive housing, and harm reduction services were initiated for his self-isolation and connection to community outreach teams for ongoing support. DISCUSSION: This case illustrates how "risk mitigation" prescribing supported patient's self-isolation, reduced his illicit drug use, and offered an opportunity for healthcare engagement. Access to safer alternatives to the toxic drug supply should continue beyond COVID-19 pandemic to address the persistent issues of contaminated drug supply and the overdose crisis in North America.

"COVID just kind of opened a can of whoop-ass": The rapid growth of safer supply prescribing during the pandemic documented through an environmental scan of addiction and harm reduction services in Canada.

OBJECTIVES: In the context of the ongoing overdose crisis, a stark increase in toxic drug deaths from the unregulated street supply accompanied the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT - hydromorphone or medical-grade heroin), tablet-based iOAT (TiOAT), and safer supply prescribing are emerging interventions used to address this crisis in Canada. Given rapid clinical guidance and policy change to enable their local adoption, our objectives were to describe the state of these interventions before the pandemic, and to document and explain changes in implementation during the early pandemic response (March-May 2020). METHODS: Surveys and interviews with healthcare providers comprised this mixed methods national environmental scan of iOAT, TiOAT, and safer supply across Canada at two time points. Quantitative data were summarized using descriptive statistics; interview data were coded and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: 103 sites in 6 Canadian provinces included 19 iOAT, 3 TiOAT and 21 safer supply sites on March 1, 2020; 60 new safer supply sites by May 1 represented a 285% increase. Most common substances were opioids, available at all sites; most common settings were addiction treatment programs and primary care clinics, and onsite pharmacies models. 79% of safer supply services were unfunded. Diversity in service delivery models demonstrated broad adaptability. Qualitative data reinforced the COVID-19 pandemic as the driving force behind scale-up. DISCUSSION: Data confirmed the capacity for rapid scale-up of flexible, community-based safer supply prescribing during dual public health emergencies. Geographical, client demographic, and funding gaps highlight the need to target barriers to implementation, service delivery and sustainability.

The changing landscape of pharmaceutical alternatives to the unregulated drug supply during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The dual COVID-19 and overdose emergencies amplified strain on healthcare systems tasked with responding to both. One downstream consequence of the pandemic in the USA and Canada was a surge in drug overdoses resulting from public health-restricted access to services and an increasingly toxic unregulated drug supply. This study aimed to describe changes implemented by programs prescribing pharmaceutical alternatives to the drug supply during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: An environmental scan used surveys and qualitative interviews with service providers across Canada to examine pharmaceutical alternative prescribing practices and programs before and during the pandemic. This study summarized the nature, frequency, and reasons for pandemic-driven service delivery changes using directed content analysis, counts, and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Eighty-two of the 103 participating sites reported 1193 unique changes in physical space (368), client protocols (347), program operations (342), ancillary services (127), and staffing (90). Four qualitative themes describing the reasons for these changes emerged, namely (1) decreasing risk of COVID-19 infection; (2) decreasing risk of overdose; (3) prioritizing acute care of COVID-19 patients; and (4) improving client access to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: While most changes were aimed at decreasing risk of COVID-19 infection, some were found to be at odds with the measures needed to combat the overdose crisis; others met dual objectives of decreased risk of both overdose and infection. Further research should examine which changes should be kept or reversed once COVID-19-related public health measures are lifted.

Low awareness of risk mitigation prescribing in response to dual crises of COVID-19 and overdose deaths among people who use unregulated drugs in Vancouver, Canada.

BACKGROUND: When the novel coronavirus pandemic emerged in March 2020, many settings across Canada and the USA were already contending with an existing crisis of drug overdoses due to the toxic unregulated drug supply. In response, the Canadian province of British Columbia (BC) released innovative risk mitigation prescribing (RMP) guidelines for medical professionals to prescribe pharmaceutical alternatives to unregulated drugs in an effort to support the self-isolation of people who use unregulated drugs (PWUD) in preventing both SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and overdoses. We sought to assess the level of awareness of RMP and identify factors associated with this awareness among PWUD in Vancouver, BC. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were derived from participants enrolled in three community-recruited prospective cohort studies of PWUD in Vancouver, interviewed between July and November 2020. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with awareness of RMP. RESULTS: Among 633 participants, 302 (47.7%) had heard of RMP. Of those 302 participants, 199 (65.9%) had never tried to access RMP services, ten (3.3%) made an unsuccessful attempt to access RMP, and 93 (30.8%) received RMP. In the multivariable analysis, participants who had awareness of RMP guidelines were more likely to self-identify as white (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01, 2.13), to have completed secondary school education or higher (AOR = 1.67; 95% CI: 1.16, 2.39), to have used drugs at a supervised consumption or overdose prevention site in the past six months (AOR = 1.66; 95% CI: 1.10, 2.52), and to have received opioid agonist therapy as treatment for opioid use disorder in the past six months (AOR = 1.51; 95% CI: 1.02, 2.24). CONCLUSION: At least four months after the release of the guidelines, RMP was known to less than half of our study participants, warranting urgent educational efforts for PWUD, particularly among racialized groups and those who were not accessing other harm reduction services. Furthermore, the majority of participants who were aware of RMP guidelines had never tried to access the service, suggesting the need to improve perceived accessibility and knowledge of eligibility criteria.