ASAP: A pharmacy-level intervention to increase nonprescription syringe sales to reduce bloodborne illnesses.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacy syringe sales are effective structural interventions to reduce bloodborne illnesses in populations, and are legal in all but two states. Yet evidence indicates reduced syringe sales in recent years. This study was designed as a feasibility test of an intervention to promote syringe sales by pharmacies in Arizona. METHODS: A four-month pilot among three Arizona pharmacies measured feasibility and acceptability through monthly surveys to 18 enrolled pharmacy staff members. RESULTS: Pharmacy staff reported increased ease of dispensing syringes across the study. Rankings of syringe dispensing as 'easiest' among 6 measured pharmacy practices increased from 38.9 % at baseline to 50.1 % post intervention module training, and to 83.3 % at pilot conclusion. The majority (72.2 %) of pharmacy staff agreed that intervention materials were easy to use. Over 70 % indicated that the intervention was influential in their "being more open to selling syringes without a prescription to someone who might use them for illicit drug use," and 61.1 % reported that in the future, they were highly likely to dispense syringes to customers who would use them to inject drugs. A vast majority (92 %) reported being likely to dispense subsidized naloxone if available to their pharmacy at no cost. CONCLUSIONS: An education-based intervention was found to be feasible and acceptable to pharmacy staff and had an observed impact on perceptions of ease and likelihood of dispensing syringes without a prescription to people who may use them to inject drugs.

Dialing for doctors: Secret shopper study of Arizona methadone and buprenorphine providers, 2022.

INTRODUCTION: Methadone and buprenorphine are effective and safe treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) and also reduce overdose and all-cause mortality. Identifying and reaching providers of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) has proven difficult for prospective patients and researchers. OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of government-maintained lists of Arizona (AZ) providers prescribing MOUD, and the extent to which these providers are accessible for treatment. METHODS: A two-phase study used a listing of 2376 AZ MOUD providers obtained from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Phase 1 assessed the accuracy of the listing using internet confirmatory research from May-October 2022. Phase 2 used the resulting list of 838 providers to assess provider availability, type of MOUD treatment provided, and accepted payment through secret shopper calls between November 16 and 30, 2022. RESULTS: Just over half (52.2 %, n = 1240) of providers were removed from the original listing during Phase 1. One quarter (25.9 %) were no longer in practice. Among the 833 eligible for the secret shopper Phase 2 study, 36.6 % (n = 307) were reached and identified as providing MOUD. A vast majority (88.1 %) of MOUD providers indicating treatment type were accepting new patients, however methadone was identified far more frequently than was likely permitted or provided for OUD. Providers were 5.5 times more likely to accept new patients if they accepted cash payment for services, and 4.9 times more likely if they accepted Medicaid. Rural areas remained underserved. CONCLUSIONS: The active population of MOUD providers is far smaller than surmised. DEA and SAMHSA provider listings are not sufficiently accurate for survey research sampling. Other means of representative sampling will need to be devised, and trusted lists of providers for prospective patients should be promoted, publicly available, and regularly maintained for accuracy. Providers that offer treatment should assure that public-facing staff have basic information about the practice, the treatment offered, and conditions for taking new patients. Concerted efforts must assure rural access at the most local levels to reduce patient travel burden.

Feasibility and acceptability of a proposed pharmacy-based harm reduction intervention to reduce opioid overdose, HIV and hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based harm reduction intervention components which might benefit pharmacy patients have not been integrated and studied. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and acceptability of a proposed pharmacy-based harm reduction intervention to reduce opioid overdose, HIV and hepatitis C called PharmNet. METHODS: Indiana managing pharmacists were surveyed in 2018 to assess the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention for opioid misuse screening, brief intervention, syringe and naloxone dispensing, and referrals provision. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research informed the survey development and analysis. RESULTS: The sample included 303 (30.8%) pharmacists; 215 (70.9%) provided detailed written comments. Intervention Characteristics: 83.3% believed PharmNet would benefit patients, and that staff could deliver the intervention with adequate training (70.0%). Inner Setting: While 77.2% believed their pharmacy culture supported practice change, 57.5% of chain pharmacists believed their pharmacies would not have time for PharmNet. Outer Setting: 73.3% believed additional addiction and overdose screening is needed in their community, and pharmacies should offer new services to help reduce opioid overdose and addiction among their patients (79.5%). A vast majority (97.7%) were asked by patients in the past 2 years about syringe related issues; 67.7% were asked about syringes for non-prescription injection drug use. Individuals Involved: While 62.4% believed PharmNet was within pharmacy scope of practice and 90.1% were comfortable consulting about syringe use, pharmacists reported that they had limited control over the implementation environment. PROCESS: 38.0% of pharmacists indicated interest in advising the development of PharmNet. CONCLUSIONS: An implementation trial of a modified version of PharmNet is likely feasible; yet will be challenged by structural pressures particularly in chain pharmacies. Successful implementation will involve the development of resources and policy components to manage outer and inner setting characteristics and align the intervention to the implementation environment.

Predicting Pharmacist Dispensing Practices and Comfort Related to Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for HIV Prevention (PrEP).

To identify factors associated with pharmacist dispensing practice and comfort counseling patients about pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV prevention (PrEP). Cross-sectional 2016 census of Indiana managing pharmacists measured PrEP awareness, comfort dispensing and counseling patients. Modified Poisson models with robust error variance estimated relative risks and confidence intervals. 15.8% of 284 pharmacists had dispensed PrEP and 11.6% had consulted about it. Dispensing and comfort counseling were associated with confidence in knowledge about PrEP medication adherence and adverse effects of PrEP medication; awareness about PrEP before the survey, number of full time pharmacists in their pharmacy, and increases in new HIV cases from 2015 to 2016 in communities served. Comfort counseling about PrEP was associated with the belief that pharmacists can be an important resource for HIV and HCV treatment.

Predicting pharmacy naloxone stocking and dispensing following a statewide standing order, Indiana 2016.

BACKGROUND: While naloxone, the overdose reversal medication, has been available for decades, factors associated with its availability through pharmacies remain unclear. Studies suggest that policy and pharmacist beliefs may impact availability. Indiana passed a standing order law for naloxone in 2015 to increase access to naloxone. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with community pharmacy naloxone stocking and dispensing following the enactment of a statewide naloxone standing order. METHODS: A 2016 cross-sectional census of Indiana community pharmacists was conducted following a naloxone standing order. Community, pharmacy, and pharmacist characteristics, and pharmacist attitudes about naloxone dispensing, access, and perceptions of the standing order were measured. Modified Poisson and binary logistic regression models attempted to predict naloxone stocking and dispensing, respectively. RESULTS: Over half (58.1%) of pharmacies stocked naloxone, yet 23.6% of pharmacists dispensed it. Most (72.5%) pharmacists believed the standing order would increase naloxone stocking, and 66.5% believed it would increase dispensing. Chain pharmacies were 3.2 times as likely to stock naloxone. Naloxone stocking was 1.6 times as likely in pharmacies with more than one full-time pharmacist. Pharmacies where pharmacists received naloxone continuing education in the past two years were 1.3 times as likely to stock naloxone. The attempted dispensing model yielded no improvement over the constant-only model. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacies with larger capacity took advantage of the naloxone standing order. Predictors of pharmacist naloxone dispensing should continue to be explored to maximize naloxone access.

Assessing HIV care and unmet need: eight data bases and a bit of perseverance.

This study integrated healthcare information from multiple data sources to measure access to HIV primary care in the St. Louis, Missouri area between 1998-2002. We describe the process of creating the collective database and the degree to which each dataset contributed to the calculation of global variables such as evidence of HIV primary care. Descriptive analyses were used to measure evidence of HIV primary among the included data sources. This study was the first of its kind to study HIV primary healthcare access over a period of five years with integrated databases. Findings reinforce the importance of HIV laboratory values as indicators of access to HIV primary healthcare, particularly in the absence of other health data sets. Limitations to the study were posed by data availability and integration of data sources with varying purposes and sophistication.