Factors Associated with HIV Testing Among People Who Inject Drugs: Findings from a Multistate Study at the Start of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Few studies have examined HIV testing among people who inject drugs (PWID) during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study examines factors associated with PWID who have been recently (past six months) tested for HIV during the COVID-19 pandemic. PWID were recruited between August 2020 and January 2021 from 22 drug treatment and harm reduction programs in nine states and the District of Columbia. We used logistic regression to identify correlates of recent HIV testing among PWID (n = 289). Most (52.9%) PWID reported having been recently tested for HIV. Factors associated with recent HIV testing included: having attended college [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.32, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.32-4.10], weekly hunger (aOR 2.08, 95% CI 1.20-3.60), crystal methamphetamine injection (aOR 2.04, 95% CI 1.05-3.97), and non-metropolitan residence (aOR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13, 0.88). Findings suggest HIV testing initiatives should be expanded during times of crisis, such as global pandemics.

Factors associated with receptive injection equipment sharing among people who inject drugs: findings from a multistate study at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Receptive injection equipment sharing (i.e., injecting with syringes, cookers, rinse water previously used by another person) plays a central role in the transmission of infectious diseases (e.g., HIV, viral hepatitis) among people who inject drugs. Better understanding these behaviors in the context of COVID-19 may afford insights about potential intervention opportunities in future health crises. OBJECTIVE: This study examines factors associated with receptive injection equipment sharing among people who inject drugs in the context of COVID-19. METHODS: From August 2020 to January 2021, people who inject drugs were recruited from 22 substance use disorder treatment programs and harm reduction service providers in nine states and the District of Columbia to complete a survey that ascertained how the COVID-19 pandemic affected substance use behaviors. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with people who inject drugs having recently engaged in receptive injection equipment sharing. RESULTS: One in four people who inject drugs in our sample reported having engaged in receptive injection equipment sharing in the past month. Factors associated with greater odds of receptive injection equipment sharing included: having a high school education or equivalent (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.14, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.24, 3.69), experiencing hunger at least weekly (aOR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.01, 3.56), and number of drugs injected (aOR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.02, 1.30). Older age (aOR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.94, 1.00) and living in a non-metropolitan area (aOR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.18, 1.02) were marginally associated with decreased odds of receptive injection equipment sharing. CONCLUSIONS: Receptive injection equipment sharing was relatively common among our sample during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings contribute to existing literature that examines receptive injection equipment sharing by demonstrating that this behavior was associated with factors identified in similar research that occurred before COVID. Eliminating high-risk injection practices among people who inject drugs requires investments in low-threshold and evidence-based services that ensure persons have access to sterile injection equipment.

Increased solitary drug use during COVID-19: An unintended consequence of social distancing.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, overdose rates substantially increased in the United States. One possible contributor to this phenomenon may be solitary drug use resulting from social distancing efforts to prevent COVID-19 transmission. METHODS: We surveyed 458 people who use drugs (PWUD) who were recruited from harm reduction and drug treatment providers located in nine states and the District of Columbia. We assessed if solitary drug use had increased since the start of COVID-19. Associations between increased solitary drug use and sociodemographic characteristics, drug use characteristics, and COVID-19 prevention behaviors were examined using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Half the sample identified as men (52.7%), White (49.7%), and single (49.3%). The average age was 43.2 (SD:11.8) years. Two-thirds (66.8%) recently injected drugs. 44% reported increased solitary drug use since COVID-19. Significant correlates of increased solitary drug use included being single (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR]=1.99, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.33, 2.98), increasing drug use (aOR=2.74, 95% CI: 1.72, 4.37), using more in private locations (aOR=1.91, 95% CI: 1.34, 2.72), and social distancing behaviors (aOR=1.31, 95% CI: 1.11, 1.54). Experiencing homelessness (aOR=0.45, 95% CI: 0.31, 0.65) and identifying as a sexual minority (aOR=0.53, 95% CI: 0.31, 0.93) were associated with being less likely to increase solitary drug use. CONCLUSIONS: Solitary drug use increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Increases in solitary drug use, in the context of a drug market increasingly permeated by fentanyl, indicates an urgent need for comprehensive harm reduction interventions to reduce overdose mortality.

Intersecting substance use treatment and harm reduction services: exploring the characteristics and service needs of a community-based sample of people who use drugs.

BACKGROUND: Substance use treatment and harm reduction services are essential components of comprehensive strategies for reducing the harms of drug use and overdose. However, these services have been historically siloed, and there is a need to better understand how programs that serve people who use drugs (PWUD) are integrating these services. In this study, we compared treatment and harm reduction services offered by a multistate sample of substance use service providers and assessed how well they align with characteristics and needs of clients they serve early in the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We recruited a convenience sample of programs that deliver harm reduction and/or treatment services in ten US states. Program directors participated in a survey assessing the services offered at their program. We also recruited clients of these programs to participate in a survey assessing a range of sociodemographic and health characteristics, substance use behaviors, and health service utilization. We then cross-compared client characteristics and behaviors relative to services being offered through these programs. RESULTS: We collected and analyzed data from 511 clients attending 18 programs that we classified as either offering treatment with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) (N = 6), syringe service programs (SSP) (N = 8), or offering both MOUD and SSP (N = 4). All programs delivered a range of treatment and harm reduction services, with MOUD & SSP programs delivering the greatest breadth of services. There were discrepancies between services provided and characteristics and behaviors reported by clients: 80% of clients of programs that offered MOUD without SSP actively used drugs and 50% injected drugs; 40% of clients of programs that offered SSP without MOUD sought drug treatment services. Approximately half of clients were unemployed and unstably housed, but few programs offered direct social services. CONCLUSIONS: In many ways, existing programs are not meeting the service needs of PWUD. Investing in innovative models that empower clients and integrate a range of accessible and flexible treatment, harm reduction and social services can pave the way for a more effective and equitable service system that considers the long-term health of PWUD.

Implications of attitudes and beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines for vaccination campaigns in the United States: A latent class analysis.

Unprecedented global efforts in vaccine development have resulted in effective vaccines for COVID-19. The pandemic response in the US has been highly politicized, resulting in significant opposition to public health efforts, including vaccines. We aimed to understand patterns of attitudes and beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine to inform vaccination campaigns. 583 English speaking United States adults were surveyed November 18-29, 2020. Participants answered 11 questions about their attitudes and beliefs about a COVID-19 vaccine, including perceived vaccine effectiveness, likelihood of getting vaccinated, and concerns that vaccine development was rushed/influenced by politics. We conducted a latent class analysis to identify profiles of attitudes/beliefs about a COVID-19 vaccine. We identified four classes of COVID-19 vaccine beliefs. The pro-vaccine class (28.8%) was willing to get vaccinated and had broadly positive beliefs about the vaccine. The development concerns class (27.8%) was willing to get vaccinated but was concerned about the development process. The third class (22.6%) was largely unsure if they would get vaccinated and if their peer groups would be vaccinated. The forth class (anti-vaccine, 20.8%) was dominated by an unwillingness to get vaccinated, vaccine distrust, vaccine development concerns, and peers groups with negative vaccine intentions. Given the large proportion of individuals who were concerned about the COVID-19 vaccine development process, messaging about rigor and approval processes may be critical to securing this group's commitment to vaccination. Having scientific and cultural leaders endorse vaccination may also be influential.

Social norms and prevention behaviors in the United States early in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The current study assessed how social norms were associated with the three effective Covid-19 prevention behaviors of social distancing, handwashing, and wearing protective face masks during the early stages of the pandemic in the US. Study participants were recruited online. Data from the present study was from a baseline quantitative survey administered from March 25th-27th, 2020. The 808 study participants were recruited for a longitudinal study online. Eligibility requirements included age 18 or older, living in the United States, English speaking and reading had heard of the Coronavirus or Covid-19, and provided informed consent. The three outcome variables were handwashing, mask wearing, and social distancing. Injunctive and descriptive norms were assessed. The injunctive norm of perceiving friends would find them rude if they did not affiliate with them because Covid-19 was associated with all three outcomes in both the bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models with adjusted odds ratios ranging from (aOR) = .80 for handwashing to aOR = .63 for social distancing and aOR = .77 for mask wearing. The descriptive cognitive norm of friends worrying about becoming infected was associated with all three outcomes in the bivariate analysis but only mask wearing in the multivariate models (aOR = 1.74). The study findings suggest there are strong social factors that correlate with behaviors to prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. These findings also suggest that public health communication campaigns should focus on more than heightening risk perceptions. They should include attention to social norms and perceptions of social risks to significant others.

Implications of Attitudes and Beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines for Vaccination Campaigns in the United States: a Latent Class Analysis

Unprecedented global efforts in vaccine development have resulted in effective vaccines for COVID-19. The pandemic response in the US has been highly politicized, resulting in significant opposition to public health efforts, including vaccines. We aimed to understand patterns of attitudes and beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine to inform vaccination campaigns. 583 English speaking United States adults were surveyed November 18-29, 2020. Participants answered 11 questions about their attitudes and beliefs about a COVID-19 vaccine, including perceived vaccine effectiveness, likelihood of getting vaccinated, and concerns that vaccine development was rushed/influenced by politics. We conducted a latent class analysis to identify profiles of attitudes/beliefs about a COVID-19 vaccine. We identified four classes of COVID-19 vaccine beliefs. The pro-vaccine class (28.8%) was willing to get vaccinated and had broadly positive beliefs about the vaccine. The development concerns class (27.8%) was willing to get vaccinated but was concerned about the development process. The third class (22.6%) was largely unsure if they would get vaccinated and if their peer groups would be vaccinated. The forth class (anti-vaccine, 20.8%) was dominated by an unwillingness to get vaccinated, vaccine distrust, vaccine development concerns, and peers groups with negative vaccine intentions. Given the large proportion of individuals who were concerned about the COVID-19 vaccine development process, messaging about rigor and approval processes may be critical to securing this group’s commitment to vaccination. Having scientific and cultural leaders endorse vaccination may also be influential.

Distress in the time of COVID-19: Understanding the distinction between COVID-19 specific mental distress and depression among United States adults.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many Americans have experienced mental distress, which may be partially characterized by a rise in mental illnesses. However, COVID-19 specific psychological distress may also be separate from diagnosable conditions, a distinction that has not been well established in the context of the pandemic. METHODS: Data came from an online survey of US adults collected in March 2020. We used factor analysis to assess the relationship between COVID-19 related mental distress and depressive symptoms. Using four questions on psychological distress modified for COVID-19 and eight depressive symptoms, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to identify the factor structure and then estimated a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). RESULTS: The EFA model indicated a two-factor solution, where the COVID-19 distress items loaded onto the first factor and depression items loaded onto the second. Only two items cross-loaded between factors: feeling fearful and being bothered by things that do not usually bother the participant. The CFA indicated that this factor structure fit the data adequately (RMSEA=0.106, SRMR=0.046, CFI=0.915, TLI=0.890). LIMITATIONS: It is possible that there are additional important symptoms of COVID-19 distress that were not included. Depression symptoms were measured via the CES-D-10, which while validated is not equivalent to a clinician diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: As COVID-19 related mental distress appears to be distinct from, though related to, depression, public health responses must consider what aspects of depression treatment may apply to this phenomenon. For COVID-related distress, it may be more appropriate to treat symptomatically and with supportive psychotherapy.

Health Beliefs and Preventive Behaviors Among Adults During the Early COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: a Latent Class Analysis.

The objectives of this study are to (1) characterize patterns of preventive behaviors 3 months after the COVID-19 pandemic was declared a national emergency in the USA and (2) identify how health beliefs (e.g., perceived risk of infection, perceived risk of death upon infection, and perceived effectiveness of CDC-recommended preventive behaviors) and sociodemographic characteristics are associated with preventive behaviors. Data were obtained from two waves of the Understanding America Study (UAS) conducted in March (wave 1) and May to June of 2020 (wave 2) (n = 4445); UAS is a nationally representative panel of US adults. We conducted a latent class analysis (LCA) using wave 2 data to identify our outcome, patterns of 10 COVID-preventive behaviors (e.g., wearing a facemask, handwashing, social distancing), and then used a three-step regression (R3STEP) to test associations between the likelihood of class membership with (1) health beliefs and sociodemographic characteristics (age, sex, race/ethnicity, and educational attainment) in bivariate models and (2) health beliefs adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics in multivariate models. The LCA identified a three-class model of preventive behaviors characterized by high likelihood of engagement in the set of preventive behaviors ("high"), low likelihood of the preventive behaviors ("low"), or engagement in some behaviors ("mixed"). Respondents of older age (i.e., age 50 or older) and those with higher levels of educational attainment (i.e., a 4-year college degree or higher) were less likely to be in the low engagement versus the mixed engagement class compared to those who are younger (18-29) and have lower levels of educational attainment (i.e., high school), respectively. Women (compared to men) and respondents who were Black and/or Hispanic/Latinx (compared to White) were more likely to be in the high (vs. mixed) engagement class. In separate models adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, respondents with a high perceived risk of infection, high perceived risk of death, and high perceived effectiveness of COVID-preventive behaviors were statistically significantly less likely to be in the low engagement relative to the mixed engagement class. Engagement in COVID-preventive behaviors varies by sociodemographic characteristics (i.e., age, sex, race/ethnicity and educational attainment) and health beliefs (i.e., perceived risk of infection, perceived risk of death, and perceived effectiveness of CDC-recommended behaviors). Our findings highlight the potential utility of using health beliefs to inform targeted prevention efforts to help reduce the spread of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Practical implications of naloxone knowledge among suburban people who use opioids.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone distribution programs have been a cornerstone of the public health response to the overdose crisis in the USA. Yet people who use opioids (PWUO) continue to face a number of barriers accessing naloxone, including not knowing where it is available. METHODS: We used data from 173 PWUO from Anne Arundel County, Maryland, which is located between Baltimore City and Washington, DC. We assessed the prevalence of recently (past 6 months) receiving naloxone and currently having naloxone, the type(s) of the naloxone kits received, and the perceived ease/difficultly of accessing naloxone. We also assessed participants knowledge of where naloxone was available in the community. RESULTS: One third (35.7%) of participants had recently received naloxone. Most who had received naloxone received two doses (72.1%), nasal naloxone (86.9%), and education about naloxone use (72.1%). Most currently had naloxone in their possession (either on their person or at home; 78.7%). One third (34.4%) believed naloxone was difficult to obtain in their community. Only half (56.7%) knew of multiple locations where they could get naloxone. The health department was the most commonly identified naloxone source (58.0%). Identifying multiple sources of naloxone was associated with being more likely to perceive that naloxone is easy to access. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that additional public health efforts are needed to make PWUO aware of the range of sources of naloxone in their communities in order to ensure easy and continued naloxone access to PWUO.

Political partisanship and stigma against people who use drugs in opinions about allocating COVID-19 prevention resources to vulnerable populations.

BACKGROUND: The distribution of resources during the COVID-19 pandemic has been politicized and contentious in the United States. Vulnerable populations, such as those living in poverty, experiencing homelessness, or who use drugs, are particularly susceptible to becoming infected with COVID-19 and often have limited access to protective supplies, such as masks and hand sanitizer. Our aim was to understand public opinion on increasing the allocation of COVID-19 prevention resources to vulnerable populations. METHODS: Data were from an online survey of 680 United States adults. Participants' opinions on the allocation of COVID-19 prevention resources to people with low income, experiencing homelessness, or who use drugs were assessed using a five-item Likert scale. We examined the prevalence of these opinions and their relationship to sociodemographic characteristics, COVID-19 beliefs, and drug-related experiences. RESULTS: Most participants supported increasing resources for individuals with low incomes (79.6%) and experiencing homelessness (74.6%), while a minority supported increasing resources for people who use drugs (33.5%). Politically conservative participants were less likely to support increasing resources for all three populations than those who were politically liberal. Skepticism about the severity of COVID-19 was also associated with less support for increasing resources across groups. DISCUSSION: Our results demonstrate that people who use drugs continue to be stigmatized in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in popular opinion not supporting people who use drugs with potentially lifesaving resources. Overcoming this stigma is essential to prevent COVID-19 among people who use drugs, a population which experiences elevated risk of COVID-19 infection.