Considerations for the design of overdose education and naloxone distribution interventions: results of a multi-stakeholder workshop.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdose epidemic is a public health crisis that is impacting communities around the world. Overdose education and naloxone distribution programs equip and train lay people to respond in the event of an overdose. We aimed to understand factors to consider for the design of naloxone distribution programs in point-of-care settings from the point of view of community stakeholders. METHODS: We hosted a multi-stakeholder co-design workshop to elicit suggestions for a naloxone distribution program. We recruited people with lived experience of opioid overdose, community representatives, and other stakeholders from family practice, emergency medicine, addictions medicine, and public health to participate in a full-day facilitated co-design discussion wherein large and small group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic approaches. RESULTS: A total of twenty-four participants participated in the multi-stakeholder workshop from five stakeholder groups including geographic and setting diversity. Collaborative dialogue and shared storytelling revealed seven considerations for the design of naloxone distribution programs specific to training needs and the provision of naloxone, these are: recognizing overdose, how much naloxone, impact of stigma, legal risk of responding, position as conventional first aid, friends and family as responders, support to call 911. CONCLUSION: To create an naloxone distribution program in emergency departments, family practice and substance use treatment services, stigma is a central design consideration for training and naloxone kits. Design choices that reference the iconography, type, and form of materials associated with first aid have the potential to satisfy the need to de-stigmatize overdose response.

Outcomes of a mobile medical unit for low-threshold buprenorphine access targeting opioid overdose hot spots in Chicago.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdoses in Chicago are unevenly distributed, affecting medically underserved neighborhoods most acutely. Innovations in reaching patients perceived to be hard-to-reach (e.g., unstably housed, marginalized), especially in these underserved neighborhoods, are urgently needed to combat the overdose crisis. This study characterizes the pilot year of a mobile medical unit partnership between a large urban academic center and a community-based harm reduction organization in Chicago. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of all patients who were seen on a mobile medical unit focused on providing low-threshold buprenorphine and primary care in areas with high opioid overdose rates on Chicago's West Side. Treatment episodes were accrued between July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022 in the first year of operation. The main outcomes were number of patients seen, demographic characteristics of patients, and reason(s) for visit over time. RESULTS: The study saw 587 unique patients on the mobile medical unit between July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022. Approximately 64.6 % were African American, and more than half lacked active insurance or could not confirm insurance status at the time of visit. The most common reason for initial visit was COVID-19 vaccination (42.4 %), and the most common reason for follow-up visit was buprenorphine treatment (51.0 %). Eleven patients initially presented for other health concerns and later returned to initiate buprenorphine. CONCLUSIONS: The mobile medical unit successfully reached nearly 600 patients in traditionally medically underserved Chicago neighborhoods with the highest overdose rates. The mobile unit's integrated approach met a variety of health needs, including buprenorphine initiation, with a unique opportunity for postoverdose initiation. Several patients initiated buprenorphine after presenting for different health concerns, showing the potential of an integrated approach to build on past mobile outreach programs and reach people with opioid use disorder who are not yet ready to initiate treatment.

Experiences of patients at high risk of opioid overdose accessing emergency department and behavioral health interventions: a qualitative analysis in an urban emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Departments (EDs) have become critical 'touchpoints' for the identification and early engagement of patients at risk of overdose or who have an opioid use disorder (OUD). Our objectives were to examine patients' ED experiences, identify barriers and facilitators of service uptake in ED settings, and explore patients' experiences with ED staff. METHODS: This qualitative study was part of a randomized controlled trial that evaluated the effectiveness of clinical social workers and certified peer recovery specialists in increasing treatment uptake and reducing opioid overdose rates for people with OUD. Between September 2019 and March 2020, semi-structured interviews were conducted 19 participants from the trial. Interviews sought to assess participants' ED care experiences across intervention type (i.e., clinical social worker or peer recovery specialist). Participants were purposively sampled across intervention arm (social work, n = 11; peer recovery specialist, n = 7; control, n = 1). Data were analyzed thematically with a focus on participant experiences in the ED and social and structural factors shaping care experiences and service utilization. RESULTS: Participants reported varied ED experiences, including instances of discrimination and stigma due to their substance use. However, participants underscored the need for increased engagement of people with lived experience in ED settings, including the use of peer recovery specialists. Participants highlighted that ED provider interactions were critical drivers of shaping care and service utilization and needed to be improved across EDs to improve post-overdose care. CONCLUSIONS: While the ED provides an opportunity to reach patients at risk of overdose, our results demonstrate how ED-based interactions and service provision can impact ED care engagement and service utilization. Modifications to care delivery may improve experiences for patients with OUD or at high risk for overdose. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration: NCT03684681.

Predictors of opioid overdose during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of relapse, treatment access and nonprescribed buprenorphine/naloxone.

INTRODUCTION: Emerging data indicate a disproportionate increase in overdose deaths since the onset of COVID-19. Speculation about causes for the increase center on rising drug use, illicit drug supply changes, and reduced treatment access. Possible overdose mitigation factors include reduced federal MOUD prescribing restrictions, naloxone distribution programs, and increased use of telehealth. Similarly, nonprescribed buprenorphine (NPB) use, increasingly described as a harm reduction strategy in the absence of treatment, may have moderated overdose risk. This study explored factors associated with pandemic-related overdose in people who use opioids (PWUO) in New Jersey. METHODS: We surveyed 342 PWUO from March to May 2021. Approximately 50 % of our sample was treated at some time since the COVID-19 emergency declaration in March 2020. The risk and protective factors associated with overdose were identified using Pearson's chi square test and ANOVA and tested in a series of multivariable logistic regression models for the full sample and the subsample of PWUO treated during the pandemic. RESULTS: Forty-eight percent of respondents increased their drug use during the pandemic, including 32 % who relapsed after previous abstinence. Fifteen percent overdosed at least once since March 2020. In the full sample, overdose was associated with Hispanic ethnicity (AOR = 3.51; 95 % CI = 1.22-10.11), pre-pandemic overdose (AOR = 6.75; 95 % CI = 3.03-15.02), lack/loss of medical insurance (AOR = 3.02; 95 % CI = 1.01-9.02), relapse (AOR = 2.94; 95 % CI = 1.36-6.36), and nonprescribed use of buprenorphine/naloxone (AOR = 3.16; 95 % CI = 1.49-6.70). The study found similar trends in the treatment sample, with the exceptions that heroin/fentanyl use also predicted overdose (AOR = 3.43; 95 % CI = 1.20-9.78) and the association of overdose with nonprescribed buprenorphine/naloxone was stronger (AOR = 4.91; 95 % CI = 2.01-12.03). Potential mitigating factors, such as take-home methadone and telehealth, were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Relapse during the pandemic was widespread and a significant contributor to overdose. Lack/loss of medical insurance further exacerbated the risk. Despite the growing literature reporting "therapeutic" use of NPB, people using nonprescribed buprenorphine/naloxone in the current study experienced up to five times the risk of overdose as nonusers. This finding suggests that, despite therapeutic intent, PWUO may be using NPB in ways that are ineffectual for addiction management, especially in the context of changing buprenorphine induction protocols in the context of fentanyl.

Opioid overdose prevention education in Texas during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Distribution of naloxone and training on its proper use are evidence-based strategies for preventing opioid overdose deaths. In-person naloxone training was conducted in major metropolitan areas and urban centers across Texas as part of a state-wide targeted opioid response program. The training program transitioned to a live, virtual format during the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. This manuscript describes the impact of this transition through analyses of the characteristics of communities reached using the new virtual training format. CASE PRESENTATION: Training participant addresses were compared to county rates of opioid overdose deaths and broadband internet access, and census block comparison to health services shortages, rural designation, and race/ethnicity community characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual training format reached more learners than the in-person events. Training reached nearly half of the counties in Texas, including all with recent opioid overdose deaths. Most participants lived in communities with a shortage of health service providers, and training reached rural areas, those with limited broadband internet availability, and majority Hispanic communities. In the context of restrictions on in-person gathering, the training program successfully shifted to a live, online format. This transition increased participation above rates observed pre-pandemic and reached communities with the need for equipping those most likely to witness an opioid overdose with the proper use of naloxone.

Examination of methadone involved overdoses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The US opioid overdose epidemic continues to escalate. The restrictions on methadone availability including take-home dosing were loosened during the COVID-19 pandemic although there have been concerns about the high street value of diverted methadone. This report examined how fatal overdoses involving methadone have changed over the past two-decades including during the pandemic. METHODS: The CDC's Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (WONDER) was used to find the unintentional methadone related overdose death rate from 1999 to 2020. Unintentional methadone deaths were defined using the ICD X40-44 codes with only data for methadone (T40.3). Data from the DEA's Automation of Reports and Consolidated Orders System (ARCOS) on methadone overall use, opioid treatment programs use, and pain management use was gathered for all states for 2020 and corrected for population. RESULTS: There have been dynamic changes over the past two-decades in methadone overdoses. Overdoses increased from 1999 (0.9/million) to 2007 (15.9) and declined until 2019 (6.5). Overdoses in 2020 (9.6) were 48.1% higher than in 2019 (t(50) = 3.05, p < .005). The state level correlations between overall methadone use (r(49) = +0.75, p < .001), and opioid treatment program use (r(49) = +0.77, p < .001) with overdoses were positive, strong, and statistically significant. However, methadone use for pain treatment was not associated with methadone overdoses (r(49) = -0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Overdoses involving methadone significantly increased by 48.1% in 2020 relative to 2019. Policy changes that were implemented following the COVID-19 pandemic involving methadone take-homes may warrant further study before they are made permanent.

Study protocol for a multisite randomized controlled trial of a peer navigator intervention for emergency department patients with nonfatal opioid overdose.

BACKGROUND: Patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) after a nonfatal opioid-involved overdose are at high risk for future overdose and death. Responding to this risk, the New York City (NYC) Department of Health and Mental Hygiene operates the Relay initiative, which dispatches trained peer "Wellness Advocates" to meet patients in the ED after a suspected opioid-involved overdose and follow them for up to 90 days to provide support, education, referrals to treatment, and other resources using a harm reduction framework. METHODS: In this article, we describe the protocol for a multisite randomized controlled trial of Relay. Study participants are recruited from four NYC EDs and are randomized to receive the Relay intervention or site-directed care (the control arm). Outcomes are assessed through survey questionnaires conducted at 1-, 3-, and 6-months after the baseline visit, as well as through administrative health data. The primary outcome is the number of opioid-related adverse events, including any opioid-involved overdose or any other substance use-related ED visit, in the 12 months post-baseline. Secondary and exploratory outcomes will also be analyzed, as well as hypothesized mediators and moderators of Relay program effectiveness. CONCLUSION: We present the protocol for a multisite randomized controlled trial of a peer-delivered OD prevention intervention in EDs. We describe how the study was designed to minimize disruption to routine ED operations, and how the study was implemented and adapted during the COVID-19 pandemic. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT04317053].

Opioid-involved overdose trainings delivered using remote learning modalities.

AIM: This education-focused study examined changes in nursing students' knowledge and attitudes towards responding to opioid-involved overdoses following participation in trainings delivered using remote learning modalities. DESIGN: This pre-post study examined learning outcomes among 17 nursing students. METHODS: Participants completed the Opioid Overdose Attitude Scale and Opioid Overdose Knowledge Scale to assess attitudes and knowledge, respectively. Trainings were delivered to two separate groups, one via virtual reality immersive video and another over video conferencing. RESULTS: Attitude scores increased by an average of 12.2 points and knowledge scores increased by 1.65 points. Within the virtual reality group, attitude scores increased by an average of 10 points, while no significant changes were observed in knowledge scores. The video conferencing group improved in both attitude and knowledge scores, by an average of 16.2 points and 2.1 points, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These hypothesis generating results illustrate the utility of remote learning approaches to deliver trainings, while maintaining social distance during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Methadone-involved overdose deaths in the United States before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have characterized methadone-involved overdose deaths in the US since 2014 despite changing patterns of opioid use, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and changes to take-home dose guidance in opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in March 2020. METHODS: Data on monthly overdose deaths in the US from January 1, 2007 to March 31, 2021 were obtained through CDC WONDER. Interrupted time series models were used to assess for changes in series levels starting in April 2020. Analyses were stratified by involvement of synthetic opioids in overdose deaths. RESULTS: An increase in methadone-involved overdoses of 105.4 deaths per month (95 % CI: 73.8-137.0) occurred starting in April 2020 compared with prior trends (p < 0.001). Trends in methadone-involved overdose deaths showed a step increase starting in April 2020 both with (54.2 deaths per month; 95 % CI: 39.4-68.9) and without (51.7 deaths per month; 95 % CI: 23.4-78.0) synthetic opioid involvement (p < 0.001 for both). Among overdose deaths without synthetic opioids, the increase in methadone-involved overdose deaths accounted for 26.5 % of the increase between the 12-month periods before and after March 2020. The relative percentage increase in methadone-involved overdose deaths, both with and without synthetic opioid co-involvement, was highest among Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Methadone-involved overdose deaths, both with and without other synthetic opioid co-involvement, increased during the 12-month period after March 2020, compared with prior trends. These results provide a cautionary addition to previous findings of no or limited methadone-related harms after the US regulatory changes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Growing Role of Gabapentin in Opioid-Related Overdoses Highlights Misuse Potential and Off-label Prescribing Practices.

This Medical News article discusses a trend of gabapentin misuse and harms, including fatal overdoses.

Treatment of overdose in the synthetic opioid era.

Overdose deaths are often viewed as the leading edge of the opioid epidemic which has gripped the United States over the past two decades (Skolnick, 2018a). This emphasis is perhaps unsurprising because opioid overdose is both the number-one cause of death for individuals between 25 and 64 years old (Dezfulian et al., 2021) and a significant contributor to the decline in average lifespan (Dowell et al., 2017). Exacerbated by the COVID 19 pandemic, it was estimated there were 93,400 drug overdose deaths in the United States during the 12 months ending December 2020, with more than 69,000 (that is, >74%) of these fatalities attributed to opioid overdose (Ahmad et al., 2021). However, the focus on mortality statistics (Ahmad et al., 2021; Shover et al., 2020) tends to obscure the broader medical impact of nonfatal opioid overdose. Analyses of multiple databases indicate that for each opioid-induced fatality, there are between 6.4 and 8.4 non-fatal overdoses, exacting a significant burden on both the individual and society. Over the past 7-8 years, there has been an alarming increase in the misuse of synthetic opioids ("synthetics"), primarily fentanyl and related piperidine-based analogs. Within the past 2-3 years, a structurally unrelated class of high potency synthetics, benzimidazoles exemplified by etonitazene and isotonitazene ("iso"), have also appeared in illicit drug markets (Thompson, 2020; Ujvary et al. 2021). In 2020, it was estimated that over 80% of fatal opioid overdoses in the United States now involve synthetics (Ahmad et al., 2021). The unique physicochemical and pharmacological properties of synthetics described in this review are responsible for both the morbidity and mortality associated with their misuse as well as their widespread availability. This dramatic increase in the misuse of synthetics is often referred to as the "3rd wave" (Pardo et al., 2019; Volkow and Blanco, 2020) of the opioid epidemic. Among the consequences resulting from misuse of these potent opioids is the need for higher doses of the competitive antagonist, naloxone, to reverse an overdose. The development of more effective reversal agents such as those described in this review is an essential component of a tripartite strategy (Volkow and Collins, 2017) to reduce the biopsychosocial impact of opioid misuse in the "synthetic era".

Willingness to use a wearable device capable of detecting and reversing overdose among people who use opioids in Philadelphia.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of opioid-related overdose deaths has been rising for 30 years and has been further exacerbated amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Naloxone can reverse opioid overdose, lower death rates, and enable a transition to medication for opioid use disorder. Though current formulations for community use of naloxone have been shown to be safe and effective public health interventions, they rely on bystander presence. We sought to understand the preferences and minimum necessary conditions for wearing a device capable of sensing and reversing opioid overdose among people who regularly use opioids. METHODS: We conducted a combined cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interview at a respite center, shelter, and syringe exchange drop-in program in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, during the COVID-19 pandemic in August and September 2020. The primary aim was to explore the proportion of participants who would use a wearable device to detect and reverse overdose. Preferences regarding designs and functionalities were collected via a questionnaire with items having Likert-based response options and a semi-structured interview intended to elicit feedback on prototype designs. Independent variables included demographics, opioid use habits, and previous experience with overdose. RESULTS: A total of 97 adults with an opioid use history of at least 3 months were interviewed. A majority of survey participants (76%) reported a willingness to use a device capable of detecting an overdose and automatically administering a reversal agent upon initial survey. When reflecting on the prototype, most respondents (75.5%) reported that they would wear the device always or most of the time. Respondents indicated discreetness and comfort as important factors that increased their chance of uptake. Respondents suggested that people experiencing homelessness and those with low tolerance for opioids would be in greatest need of the device. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of people sampled with a history of opioid use in an urban setting were interested in having access to a device capable of detecting and reversing an opioid overdose. Participants emphasized privacy and comfort as the most important factors influencing their willingness to use such a device. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04530591.

Are opioid receptor antagonists adequate for "Opioid" overdose in a changing reality?

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Deaths due to opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD) continue to rise despite intense regulatory and professional actions. COVID-19 has only worsened this situation.1 An opioid receptor antagonist (ORA) such as naloxone is the most common intervention for OIRD. However, with increasing overdose from highly potent illicit opioids and polysubstance abuse, appraisal of the adequacy of ORA seems warranted and timely. COMMENT: OIRD results from the binding of an excess number of agonist molecules to opioid receptors. Mechanistically, it makes sense to reverse this by displacing agonist molecules by administering an ORA. But realistically, the trend to higher-potency agonists and polysubstance abuse diminishes the effectiveness of this approach. We are left facing a crisis without a solution. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: For the increasingly common OIRD from highly potent illicit agonists and polysubstance overdose, ORAs are correspondingly less effective. Alternatives are needed-soon.

Cost-effectiveness of Treatments for Opioid Use Disorder.

Importance: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the US, yet many individuals with OUD do not receive treatment. Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of OUD treatments and association of these treatments with outcomes in the US. Design and Setting: This model-based cost-effectiveness analysis included a US population with OUD. Interventions: Medication-assisted treatment (MAT) with buprenorphine, methadone, or injectable extended-release naltrexone; psychotherapy (beyond standard counseling); overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND); and contingency management (CM). Main Outcomes and Measures: Fatal and nonfatal overdoses and deaths throughout 5 years, discounted lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and costs. Results: In the base case, in the absence of treatment, 42 717 overdoses (4132 fatal, 38 585 nonfatal) and 12 660 deaths were estimated to occur in a cohort of 100 000 patients over 5 years, and 11.58 discounted lifetime QALYs were estimated to be experienced per person. An estimated reduction in overdoses was associated with MAT with methadone (10.7%), MAT with buprenorphine or naltrexone (22.0%), and when combined with CM and psychotherapy (range, 21.0%-31.4%). Estimated deceased deaths were associated with MAT with methadone (6%), MAT with buprenorphine or naltrexone (13.9%), and when combined with CM, OEND, and psychotherapy (16.9%). MAT yielded discounted gains of 1.02 to 1.07 QALYs per person. Including only health care sector costs, methadone cost $16 000/QALY gained compared with no treatment, followed by methadone with OEND ($22 000/QALY gained), then by buprenorphine with OEND and CM ($42 000/QALY gained), and then by buprenorphine with OEND, CM, and psychotherapy ($250 000/QALY gained). MAT with naltrexone was dominated by other treatment alternatives. When criminal justice costs were included, all forms of MAT (with buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone) were associated with cost savings compared with no treatment, yielding savings of $25 000 to $105 000 in lifetime costs per person. The largest cost savings were associated with methadone plus CM. Results were qualitatively unchanged over a wide range of sensitivity analyses. An analysis using demographic and cost data for Veterans Health Administration patients yielded similar findings. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cost-effectiveness analysis, expanded access to MAT, combined with OEND and CM, was associated with cost-saving reductions in morbidity and mortality from OUD. Lack of widespread MAT availability limits access to a cost-saving medical intervention that reduces morbidity and mortality from OUD. Opioid overdoses in the US likely reached a record high in 2020 because of COVID-19 increasing substance use, exacerbating stress and social isolation, and interfering with opioid treatment. It is essential to understand the cost-effectiveness of alternative forms of MAT to treat OUD.

Comparing actual and forecasted numbers of unique patients dispensed select medications for opioid use disorder, opioid overdose reversal, and mental health, during the COVID-19 pandemic, United States, January 2019 to May 2020.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 community mitigation measures (e.g., stay-at-home orders) may worsen mental health and substance use-related harms such as opioid use disorder and overdose and limit access to medications for these conditions. We used nationally-representative data to assess dispensing of select substance use and mental health medications during the pandemic in the U.S. METHODS: IQVIA Total Patient Tracker data were used to calculate U.S. monthly numbers of unique patients dispensed buprenorphine, extended-release (ER) intramuscular naltrexone, naloxone, selective serotonin or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, benzodiazepines, and for comparison, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) between January 2019-May 2020. Forecasted estimates of number of unique patients dispensed medications, generated by exponential smoothing statistical forecasting, were compared to actual numbers of patients by month to examine access during mitigation measures (March 2020-May 2020). RESULTS: Between March 2020-May 2020, numbers of unique patients dispensed buprenorphine and numbers dispensed naloxone were within forecasted estimates. Numbers dispensed ER intramuscular naltrexone were significantly below forecasted estimates in March 2020 (-1039; 95 %CI:-1528 to -550), April 2020 (-2139; 95 %CI:-2629 to -1650), and May 2020 (-2498; 95 %CI:-2987 to -2009). Numbers dispensed antidepressants and benzodiazepines were significantly above forecasted estimates in March 2020 (977,063; 95 %CI:351,384 to 1,602,743 and 450,074; 95 % CI:189,999 to 710,149 additional patients, respectively), but were within forecasted estimates in April 2020-May 2020. Dispensing patterns for statins and ARBs were similar to those for antidepressants and benzodiazepines. CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing concerns about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on substance use and mental health underscore the need for innovative strategies to facilitate continued access to treatment.

Harm reduction via online platforms for people who use drugs in Russia: a qualitative analysis of web outreach work.

BACKGROUND: Harm reduction services to people who use drugs (PWUD) in Russia are insufficient in terms of quantity, government endorsement, and accessibility. The situation has recently deteriorated even further because of social distancing measures of the COVID-19 pandemic. Several organizations have started to provide some harm reduction services via online platforms by web outreach. However, little is known on how online outreach services are organized and implemented. Drawing on the example of St. Petersburg-based NGO "Humanitarian Action," we explored web outreach work in Telegram instant messenger. METHODS: Our data were comprised of 4 semi-structured interviews with the NGO staff and 301 cases of web outreach work with PWUD. We used thematic analysis to study the process of web outreach, harm reduction service provision, and needs of PWUD. RESULTS: Three stages of the process of web outreach work were identified: clients initiating communication, NGO workers addressing clients' needs, and NGO workers receiving clients' feedback. Communication proceeded in group chat or direct messages. Challenges in addressing clients' needs happened when clients turned for help after hours, sent recorded voice messages, sent unclear messages, and/or were unwilling to transition to telephone communication. All web outreach workers reported receiving only positive feedback on their work. The needs of PWUD were categorized into two major themes, depending on whether they can be addressed fully or partially online. In cases of online only provision of services, web outreach workers helped PWUD treat minor injection drug use complications, obtain verified harm reduction information and receive general psychological support. In instances of partial online services provision, PWUD were assisted in getting treatment of severe injection drug use complications, overdoses, and in accessing offline medical, psychological, social, legal and harm reduction services. CONCLUSIONS: Our research demonstrated that web outreach work is a convenient tool for delivering some harm reduction services to PWUD either partially or completely online and for recruiting new clients (including hard-to-reach PWUD that avoid attending brick-and-mortar facilities). Harm reduction organizations should consider incorporating online harm reduction services into their activities. However, further research is needed to explore relative advantages and disadvantages of online harm reduction services.