A Mind-Body Intervention to Improve Physical Activity for Patients with Chronic Hip-Related Pain: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Pain and dysfunction persist for most patients following hip-related pain treatment. Additionally, individuals with hip-related pain are typically less physically active than individuals without hip pain, despite evidence that regular physical activity reduces chronic musculoskeletal pain. Poor psychological health is common in patients with hip-related pain and further reinforces low physical activity. Mind-body interventions can improve psychological health and activity levels but have yet to be integrated to provide comprehensive, psychologically informed care for patients with hip-related pain. Thus, we are using the NCCIH intervention development framework to develop Helping Improve PSychological Health (HIPS), a novel, multimodal mind-body intervention to improve physical activity for individuals with hip-related pain and poor psychological health. METHODS: We will recruit physical therapists (N = 20) and patients with hip-related pain (N = 20) to participate in 60 min qualitative interviews (focus groups with therapists; one-on-one interviews with patients). Using these data, we will develop the initial HIPS intervention and provider training materials. One physical therapist will be trained to deliver the HIPS intervention to five participants in an open pilot trial. Participants will attend six 30 min HIPS intervention sessions. We will collect quantitative data on satisfaction, improvement, and physical activity, alongside qualitative exit interviews with participants and the physical therapist in order to refine the HIPS intervention and provider training materials. RESULTS: This study has been approved by the MGB IRB. We aim to develop and test the initial feasibility of the HIPS intervention in an open pilot trial. The findings from this project will inform a subsequent feasibility RCT.

Back Pain in the Era of Opioid Restriction and Implications for Neurosurgeons Based on Qualitative Findings From a Rural State.

Historically, back pain has been an inciting complaint for the initiation of opioids. Aggressive marketing of opioids to treat back pain coupled with the initiation of pain being treated as "the fifth vital sign" contributed to the emerging opioid crisis in the USA. West Virginia (WV) has long been considered the epicenter of the crisis. In 2018, the WV legislature passed a bill that placed prescribing limits on opioids. Our group set out to investigate the impacts of opioid prescribing restrictions through a sequential, mixed methods study evaluating prescription trends and stakeholder experiences. These stakeholder experiences generated emergent themes regarding the evolution of the opioid crisis up to and beyond the implementation of the bill, which is of relevance to neurosurgeons and back pain treatment. This study explores those findings for a neurosurgical audience. This study consisted of open-ended, semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 50 physicians, pharmacists, and patients in WV. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Content analysis was utilized as the methodological orientation. Five theoretical domains relevant to the treatment of back pain emerged, describing the prevalence of opioid use, barriers to access care, the importance of opioids for function in resource-poor rural areas, disconnected and siloed care, and patient views on the impacts of pain care gaps and solutions. Spinal pain care in rural WV is complex due to identified challenges. Care siloing factors in suboptimal spinal pain care. Future work should define, implement, and assess the real-world effectiveness of treatment paradigms for the full spectrum of surgical and non-surgical back pain complaints. Neurosurgeons should be present in this arena.

Opioid Prescribing Patterns After Imposition of Setting-Specific Limits on Prescription Duration.

Importance: Despite their widespread adoption across the US, policies imposing one-size-fits-all limits on the duration of prescriptions for opioids have shown modest and mixed implications for prescribing. Objective: To assess whether a prescription duration limit policy tailored to different clinical settings was associated with shorter opioid prescription lengths. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study examined changes in opioid prescribing patterns for opioid-naive Medicaid enrollees aged 12 to 64 years before and after implementation of a statewide prescription duration limit policy in West Virginia in June 2018. Patients with cancer or Medicare coverage were excluded. The policy assigned a 7-day duration limit to opioid prescriptions for adults treated in outpatient hospital- or office-based practices, a 4-day limit for adults treated in emergency departments, and a 3-day limit for pediatric patients younger than 18 years regardless of clinical setting. Data were examined from January 1, 2017, through September 30, 2019, and data were analyzed from June 12 to October 30, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Whether a patient's initial opioid prescription was longer in days than the June 2018 policy limit for a given care setting before and after policy implementation. Interrupted time series models were used to calculate the association between the policy's implementation and outcomes. Results: The analytic sample included 44 703 Medicaid enrollees (27 957 patients [62.5%] before policy implementation and 16 746 patients [37.5%] after policy implementation; mean [SD] age, 33.9 [13.4] years; 27 461 females [61.4%]). Among adults treated in outpatient hospital- or office-based settings, the duration limit policy was associated with a decrease of 8.83 (95% CI, -10.43 to -7.23) percentage points (P < .001), or a 56.8% relative reduction, in the proportion of prescriptions exceeding the 7-day limit. In the emergency department setting, the policy was associated with a decrease of 7.03 (95% CI, -10.38 to -3.68) percentage points (P < .001), a 37.5% relative reduction, in the proportion of prescriptions exceeding the 4-day limit. The proportion of pediatric opioid prescriptions longer than the 3-day limit decreased by 12.80 (95% CI, -17.31 to -8.37) percentage points (P < .001), a 26.5% relative reduction, after the policy's implementation. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cross-sectional study suggest that opioid prescription duration limits tailored to different clinical settings are associated with reduced length of prescriptions for opioid-naive patients. Additional research is needed to evaluate whether these limits are associated with reductions in the incidence of opioid use disorder or with unintended consequences, such as shifts to illicit opioids.

Civil commitment perspectives and experiences among friends and family of people who use illicit opioids in Massachusetts, USA.

BACKGROUND: Civil commitment statutes allow qualified individuals to petition for court-mandated commitment for someone with a substance use disorder (SUD). Despite a lack of empirical evidence showing efficacy of involuntary commitment, these statutes are prevalent worldwide. We examined perspectives on civil commitment among family members and close friends of people who use illicit opioids in Massachusetts, U.S.A. METHODS: Eligible individuals were Massachusetts residents, ≥18 years of age, did not use illicit opioids but had a close relationship with someone who did. We used a sequential mixed methods approach in which semi-structured interviews (N=22) were followed by a quantitative survey (N=260). Thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative data and survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: While some family members were influenced by SUD professionals to petition for civil commitment, influence from social networks based on personal experience was more common. Motivations for civil commitment included initiating recovery and believing that commitment would reduce overdose risk. Some reported that it afforded them respite from caring for, and worrying about, their loved one. A minority discussed increases in overdose risk following a period of forced abstinence. Participants expressed concerns about the variable quality of care during commitment, largely based on the use of corrections facilities for civil commitment in Massachusetts. A minority endorsed the use of these facilities for civil commitment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite participants' uncertainty and the harms stemming from civil commitment, including increased risk of overdose after forced abstinence and the use of corrections facilities, family members resorted to this mechanism to reduce immediate overdose risk. Our findings indicate that peer support groups are an appropriate forum to disseminate information about evidenced-based treatment and that family members and others close to those with SUD often lack adequate support for, and respite from, the stress of caring for them.

Addressing buprenorphine bottlenecks in the context of MAT Act implementation: A shared responsibility.

Medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) such as buprenorphine reduce overdose mortality and other opioid related acute health events but have historically been highly regulated. The recent Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment (MAT) Act ended the requirement clinicians complete a specified training and apply for a DATA 2000 ("X") waiver on their Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) number, to prescribe buprenorphine. With the MAT Act, any practitioner with Schedule III prescribing authority (a regular DEA number) can now prescribe buprenorphine for OUD. While this has potential to improve OUD treatment access, the impact will depend on implementation. Though the MAT Act may facilitate increased buprenorphine prescribing, ensuring adequate buprenorphine dispensing is also critical to improving Medications for opioid use disorder. Recognized buprenorphine bottlenecks arise from a complex convergence of factors in community pharmacies, threatening to undercut the benefits of the MAT Act. If prescribing increases but is not matched by increased dispensing, bottlenecks may worsen. Any worsening of buprenorphine bottlenecks could have a disproportionate impact in rural areas where residents may rely on fewer pharmacies to fill prescriptions for people in larger geographic area and where larger prescribing-dispensing gaps already exist such as in Southern states. Rigorous research will be needed to document the overall impact of the MAT Act on community pharmacists and their patients. At the federal level, pharmacists and their professional organizations should lobby the DEA to de-schedule or re-schedule buprenorphine. The DEA should announce a moratorium on enforcement actions against wholesalers and pharmacies related to buprenorphine distribution and dispensing. More supports should be offered to community pharmacies by state pharmacy boards and associations including continuing pharmacy education and technical assistance for advocating with wholesalers to increase buprenorphine order sizes, and to more effectively communicate with prescribers. Pharmacies should not have to face these challenges alone. Regulators, wholesalers, and researchers must join together with community pharmacies to further reduce regulatory barriers to dispensing, provide evidence-based interventions where needed to support pharmacy dispensing efforts, conduct rigorous implementation research, and be constantly vigilant in identifying and addressing multi-level buprenorphine bottlenecks in the wake of the MAT Act.

"You didn't have a choice, but to be on your train. The train was moving": West Virginia pharmacists' perspectives on opioid dispensing during the evolution of the opioid crisis.

BACKGROUND: West Virginia (WV) has been at the forefront of the opioid crisis in the United States, with the highest rate of opioid overdose mortality involving prescription opioids in the country. To curb the crisis, the state government implemented a restrictive opioid prescribing law in March 2018, Senate Bill 273 (SB273), to decrease opioid prescribing. However, sweeping changes in opioid policy can have downstream effects on stakeholders such as pharmacists. This study is part of a sequential mixed methods investigation of the impact of SB273 in WV in which we interviewed various stakeholders-including pharmacists-about the impact of the law. OBJECTIVES: This paper aims to explore how pharmacy practice during the opioid crisis impacted the need for restrictive legislation and how SB273 impacted subsequent pharmacy practice in WV. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 pharmacists who were practicing in counties that had been designated as high-prescribing counties based upon county-level prescribing/dispensing data from state records. Analysis of the interviews was informed by the methodological orientation of content analysis to identify emerging themes. RESULTS: Participants described confronting questionable opioid prescriptions, treatment costs, and insurance coverage driving opioids as a first-line choice for pain management, as well as the influence of corporate policies and the immense responsibility of being the "last line of defense" in the opioid crisis. A central impediment to the care of patients was the inability of the pharmacists to effectively communicate their concerns to prescribers, making improved prescriber-dispenser communication an essential next step in minimizing opioid care gaps. CONCLUSION: This is one of few qualitative studies that have explored pharmacists' experiences, perceptions, and role in the opioid crisis leading up to and during the enactment of a restrictive opioid prescribing law. In light of the difficulties they faced, a restrictive opioid prescribing law was viewed positively by pharmacists.

Drug treatment perspectives and experiences among family and friends of people who use illicit opioids: A mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is key to reducing opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Family and close friends of people with OUD can play an important role in motivating and facilitating their loved ones' treatment. We examined evolving knowledge about OUD and its treatment among family and close friends of people who use illicit opioids and their experiences navigating the treatment system. METHODS: Eligible individuals were Massachusetts residents, ≥18 years of age, did not use illicit opioids in the past 30 days, and had a close relationship with someone who currently uses illicit opioids. Recruitment leveraged a nonprofit support network for family members of persons with a substance use disorder (SUD). We used a sequential mixed methods approach, in which a series of semi-structured qualitative interviews (N = 22, April-July 2018) informed the development of a quantitative survey (N = 260, February-July 2020). Attitudes and experiences related to OUD treatment constituted an emergent theme in qualitative interviews, which informed a section of the subsequent survey. RESULTS: Both qualitative and quantitative data indicated support groups were instrumental in increasing OUD knowledge and influencing attitudes toward treatment options. Regarding how best to motivate drug treatment engagement, some participants favored what they referred to as a "tough love" approach that typically included a preference for abstinence-based treatment, while others favored a positive reinforcement approach focused on enhancing treatment motivation. Loved ones' treatment preferences and scientific evidence played a minor role in determining preferred treatment modalities, and only 38 % of survey participants believed that using medications for OUD is more effective than treatment without medications. A majority (57 %) agreed that finding a drug treatment slot or bed was either somewhat or very difficult, and that once in the system treatment was costly and involved multiple returns to treatment after relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Support groups appear to be important forums for gaining knowledge about OUD, negotiating strategies to motivate their loved ones' entry into treatment, and forming preferences for treatment modalities. Participants emphasized the influence of other group members more so than their loved ones' preferences or empirical evidence of effectiveness with regard to choosing treatment programs and approaches.

Mixed methods research: A primer for the vascular surgeon.

Mixed methods research is an approach that intentionally integrates both quantitative and qualitative research methods to answer a research question. The hallmark of mixed methods research is a focus on designing studies that integrate both quantitative and qualitative data, yielding greater results than either method could yield on its own. There are a number of fundamental concepts that are essential to conducting mixed methods research. These include a methodological approach that employs one of the three core study designs, involvement of a multidisciplinary team that includes both methodological and subject matter experts, and meticulous planning to ensure that the data collected can ultimately be integrated to yield findings that answer the original research question to the investigators' (and funders') satisfaction. In this article, we will discuss mixed methods research designs, data sources typically used in mixed methods research, and common data analysis and integration strategies. We will also provide examples of mixed methods research projects that have been used in vascular surgery. The intent of this article was to provide an overview of the field of mixed methods research, enabling the reader to critically assess mixed methods research studies in the literature and consider how this methodology might benefit their own research endeavors.

Pain Management During West Virginia's Opioid Crisis.

PURPOSE: Opioid use disorder has caused significant morbidity and mortality resulting in opioid prescribing limiting laws, such as State Bill 273 in West Virginia. The purpose of this study is to explore the impacts of a restrictive opioid prescription law on physicians in medical practice in West Virginia. METHODS: A qualitative study with open-ended semistructured interviews with a purposive sample of physicians in West Virginia. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A preliminary code book was developed by 3 coinvestigators. Interview transcriptions were analyzed with a code-based text search query. Content analysis was utilized as the methodological orientation underpinning for the current work. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 20 physicians (10 primary care physicians and 10 specialty physicians) in practice in West Virginia. Physicians identified 5 theoretical domains related to SB273: changing opioid prescribing and documentation requirements; rural socioeconomic disparities; a continuum between chronic pain and substance use disorder; difficulty in balancing patient needs and the concern for diversion; lack of available alternatives to opioids for chronic. CONCLUSION: Prescribing opioids in rural West Virginia is complex due to identified challenges. Recommendations for opioids prescribing legislation include clear messaging of guidelines and recommendations, efforts to address socioeconomic disparities of health and pain, and improved accessibility for treatment of both pain and dependence in rural communities are important areas of growth in the rural health care environment.

Pharmacy naloxone codispensing: A mixed methods study of practices and perspectives under a statewide standing order program.

BACKGROUND: In a previous statewide naloxone purchase trial conducted in Massachusetts, we documented high levels of naloxone accessibility, upon patient request, under the state's naloxone standing order (NSO) program. Equally important for reducing overdose mortality rates is expanding naloxone access via codispensing alongside opioid prescription and syringe purchases at pharmacies. OBJECTIVE: To understand naloxone codispensing from the perspective of pharmacists under the Massachusetts NSO program. METHODS: The study used a mixed methods design involving 3 focus groups and a quantitative survey. Participants in both the focus groups (N = 27) and survey (N = 339) were licensed Massachusetts pharmacists. Focus groups were conducted at 3 separate professional conferences for pharmacists. The survey was conducted using a stratified random sample of 400 chain and independent retail pharmacies across Massachusetts. All data were collected between September 2018 and November 2019. Quantitative and qualitative analyses examined current policies, practices, and attitudes regarding naloxone codispensing for patients at risk of opioid overdose. RESULTS: Most pharmacists (69%) reported that they, their pharmacy, or both promoted codispensing alongside opioid prescriptions. A majority promoting naloxone codispensing did so for patients prescribed high opioid dosages (80%); fewer promoted codispensing for patients also prescribed benzodiazepines (20%). Facilitators to codispensing were pre-existing relationships between pharmacists and prescribers, mandatory pharmacist consultation, and universal naloxone promotion to all patients meeting certain criteria. Barriers to codispensing were pharmacists' concerns about offending patients by initiating a conversation about naloxone, insufficient technician training, workflow and resource constraints, and misconceptions surrounding naloxone. We found no substantive differences in outcomes between chain and independent pharmacies. CONCLUSION: We documented several facilitators and barriers to naloxone codispensing in Massachusetts pharmacies. Areas amenable to intervention include increased training for front-line pharmacy technicians, mandatory pharmacist consultation for opioid-prescribed patients, workflow reorganization, and addressing stigma concerns on the pharmacist end.

If we build it, will they come? Perspectives on pharmacy-based naloxone among family and friends of people who use opioids: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Expanding access to the opioid antagonist naloxone to reduce overdose mortality is a public health priority in the United States. Naloxone standing orders (NSOs) have been established in many states to increase naloxone dispensing at pharmacies, but increased pharmacy access does not ensure optimal uptake among those likely to witness an overdose. In a prior statewide purchase trial, we documented high levels of naloxone access at Massachusetts pharmacies under a statewide NSO. In this study, we characterize barriers to pharmacy-based naloxone uptake among potential opioid overdose "bystanders" (friends or family of people who use opioids) that may be amenable to intervention. METHODS: Eligible bystanders were Massachusetts residents ≥ 18 years of age, did not use illicit opioids in the past 30 days, and knew someone who currently uses illicit opioids. We used a sequential mixed methods approach, in which a series of semi-structured qualitative interviews (N = 22) were conducted April-July 2018, to inform the development of a subsequent quantitative survey (N = 260), conducted February-July 2020. RESULTS: Most survey participants (77%) reported ever obtaining naloxone but few (21%) attempted to purchase it at a pharmacy. Qualitative participants revealed that barriers to utilizing the NSO included low perceived risk of overdose, which was rooted in misconceptions regarding the risks of prescription opioid misuse, denial about their loved one's drug use, and drug use stereotypes; inaccurate beliefs about the impact of naloxone on riskier opioid use; and concerns regarding anticipated stigma and confidentiality. Many participants had engaged in mutual support groups, which served as a source of free naloxone for half (50%) of those who had ever obtained naloxone. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high levels of pharmacy naloxone access in Massachusetts, few bystanders in our study had attempted to obtain naloxone under the NSO. Low perceived risk of overdose, misinformation, stigma, and confidentiality were important barriers to pharmacy naloxone uptake, all of which are amenable to intervention. Support groups provided a setting for addressing stigma and misinformation and provided a discreet and comfortable setting for naloxone access. Where these groups do not exist and for bystanders who do not participate in such groups, pharmacies are well-positioned to fill gaps in naloxone availability.

"The DEA would come in and destroy you": a qualitative study of fear and unintended consequences among opioid prescribers in WV.

BACKGROUND: West Virginia has one of the highest rates of opioid overdose related deaths and is known as the epicenter of the opioid crisis in the United States. In an effort to reduce opioid-related harms, SB 273 was signed in 2018, and aimed to restrict opioid prescribing in West Virginia. SB 273 was enacted during a time when physician arrests and convictions had been increasing for years and were becoming more prevalent and more publicized. This study aims to better understand the impact of the legislation on patients and providers. METHODS: Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted with opioid-prescribing primary care physicians and specialists practicing throughout West Virginia. RESULTS: Four themes emerged, 1. Fear of disciplinary action, 2. Exacerbation of opioid prescribing fear due to restrictive legislation, 3. Care shifts and treatment gaps, and 4. Conversion to illicit substances. The clinicians recognized the harms of inappropriate prescribing and how this could affect their patients. Decreases in opioid prescribing were already occurring prior to the law implementation. Disciplinary actions against opioid prescribers resulted in prescriber fear, which was then exacerbated by SB 273 and contributed to shifts in care that led to forced tapering and opioid under-prescribing. Providers felt that taking on patients who legitimately required opioids could jeopardize their career. CONCLUSION: A holistic and patient-centered approach should be taken by legislative and disciplinary bodies to ensure patients are not abandoned when disciplinary actions are taken against prescribers or new legislation is passed.

Hepatitis C antibody prevalence, correlates and barriers to care among people who inject drugs in Central California.

Hepatitis C (HCV) infection among people who inject drugs (PWID) is a major public health concern. We examined correlates of HCV antibody (anti-HCV) seropositivity and characteristics of prior HCV testing and treatment among PWID in Fresno, California, which has among the highest prevalence of injection drug use (IDU) in the United States. We surveyed 494 peer-recruited PWID (≥18 years of age) in 2016 about their experiences with HCV testing and treatment, and conducted HCV and HIV antibody testing for all participants. Bivariate analyses and multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify correlates of anti-HCV seropositivity. A majority (65%) tested positive for anti-HCV, with 32% of those being unaware of their HCV status. Anti-HCV seroprevalence was independently and positively associated with older age (AOR = 1.11 per year, 95% CI = 1.06, 1.17), years injecting (AOR = 1.08 per year, 95% CI = 1.03, 1.13), distributive syringe sharing (AOR = 2.76, 95% CI = 1.29, 5.94), having syringes confiscated by police (AOR = 2.65, 95% CI = 1.22, 5.74), ever trading sex (AOR = 3.51, 95% CI = 1.40, 8.81) and negatively associated with being Black/African American (non-Hispanic) (AOR = 0.06, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.47). Prior HCV testing was associated with older age, ever getting syringes from a syringe services program, and having interactions with police. For those aware of their anti-HCV seropositivity, only 11% had initiated treatment; reasons for not seeing a physician regarding diagnosis included not feeling sick (23%), currently using drugs/alcohol (19%) and not knowing where to go for HCV medical care (19%). Our findings highlight the importance of expanding community-based access to sterile syringes alongside HCV testing and treatment services, particularly at syringe service programs where PWID may be more comfortable seeking testing and treatment.

Limited access to pharmacy-based naloxone in West Virginia: Results from a statewide purchase trial.

BACKGROUND: West Virginia (WV) has the highest overdose mortality rate in the United States and expanding naloxone access is crucial for reducing opioid overdose deaths. We conducted a purchase trial to establish an objective measure of naloxone access under WV's naloxone standing order (NSO) program. METHODS: A stratified random sample of 200 chain and independent retail pharmacies across WV were included. Each pharmacy underwent two purchase attempts-one by a person who used illicit opioids (PWUIO) and one by a potential bystander who did not use illicit opioids but had a relationship with a PWUIO. We used matched-pairs analysis to identify differences in outcomes by purchaser type (PWUIO vs bystander). Chi-square and independent-samples t-tests were used to compare outcomes by pharmacy type (chain vs independent). RESULTS: Overall, 29% of purchase attempts were successful, with no significant difference between PWUIO and bystanders (p = 0.798). Fewer than half (44%) of successful purchases included verbal counseling, and bystanders were more likely to receive counseling than PWUIO (33% vs 4%, p = 0.018). Common reasons for failed purchases were naloxone not being in stock (41%), requiring a naloxone prescription (35%), and/or requiring formal identification (23%). Chain pharmacies were more likely to sell naloxone than independents (35% vs 19%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We documented limited naloxone access under the WV NSO. These findings indicate that simply establishing an NSO program is insufficient to expand access. Implementation efforts should ensure adequate naloxone stocks, pro-active delivery of NSO-related information and pharmacist training, and avoidance of recordkeeping requirements that may impede access.

Broadening access to naloxone: Community predictors of standing order naloxone distribution in Massachusetts.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone is a prescription medication that reverses opioid overdoses. Allowing naloxone to be dispensed directly by a pharmacist without an individual prescription under a naloxone standing order (NSO) can expand access. The community-level factors associated with naloxone dispensed under NSO are unknown. METHODS: Using a dataset comprised of pharmacy reports of naloxone dispensed under NSO from 70% of Massachusetts retail pharmacies, we examined relationships between community-level demographics, rurality, measures of treatment for opioid use disorder, and overdose deaths with naloxone dispensed under NSO per ZIP Code-quarter from 2014 until 2018. We used a multi-variable zero-inflated negative binomial model, assessing odds of any naloxone dispensed under NSO, as well as a multi-variable negative binomial model assessing quantities of naloxone dispensed under NSO. RESULTS: From 2014-2018, quantities of naloxone dispensed under NSO and the number of pharmacies dispensing any naloxone under NSO increased over time. However, communities with greater percentages of people with Hispanic ethnicity (aOR 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.96 per 5% increase), and rural communities compared to urban communities (aOR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.90) were less likely to dispense any naloxone by NSO. Communities with more individuals treated with buprenorphine dispensed more naloxone under NSO, as did communities with more opioid-related overdose deaths. CONCLUSION: Naloxone dispensing has substantially increased, in part driven by standing orders. A lower likelihood of naloxone being dispensed under NSO in communities with larger Hispanic populations and in more rural communities suggests the need for more equitable access to, and uptake of, lifesaving medications like naloxone.

A community-based study of abscess self-treatment and barriers to medical care among people who inject drugs in the United States.

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are the most common medical complication of injection drug use in the United States, though little work has been done assessing SSTI treatment among people who inject drugs (PWID). We examined past-3-month abscess characteristics, treatment utilization, and barriers to medical treatment among N = 494 community-recruited PWID. We used descriptive statistics to determine the frequencies of self-treatment and medical treatment for their most recent past-3-month abscess as well as barriers to seeking medical treatment. We then used bivariate and multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with having an abscess in the past 3 months. Overall, 67% of participating PWID ever had an abscess and 23% had one in the past 3 months. Only 29% got medical treatment for their most recent abscess whereas 79% self-treated. Methods for self-treatment included pressing the pus out (81%), applying a hot compress (79%), and applying hydrogen peroxide (67%). Most (91%) self-treated abscesses healed without further intervention. Barriers to medical treatment included long wait times (56%), being afraid to go (49%), and not wanting to be identified as a PWID (46%). Factors associated independently with having an abscess in the past 3 months were injecting purposely into muscle tissue (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.64), having difficulty finding a vein (AOR = 2.08), and sharing injection preparation equipment (AOR = 1.74). Our findings emphasize the importance of expanding community-based access to SSTI education and treatment services, particularly at syringe service programs where PWID may be more comfortable seeking resources.

Pharmacists' experiences with a statewide naloxone standing order program in Massachusetts: a mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVES: In a prior statewide naloxone purchase trial conducted in Massachusetts, we documented a high rate of naloxone dispensing under the state's standing order program. The purpose of this study was to understand the factors that facilitate naloxone access under the Massachusetts naloxone standing order (NSO) program and identify any remaining barriers amenable to intervention. DESIGN: Mixed methods design involving a pharmacist survey and 3 pharmacist focus groups. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Focus groups were conducted at 3 separate professional conferences for pharmacists (n = 27). The survey was conducted among Massachusetts pharmacists (n = 339) working at a stratified random sample chain and independent retail pharmacies across Massachusetts. All data were collected between September 2018 and November 2019. OUTCOME MEASURES: Facilitators and barriers to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing and pharmacists' attitudes and beliefs regarding naloxone and opioid use. RESULTS: Most pharmacists described NSO implementation as being straightforward, although differences were reported by pharmacy type in both the survey and focus groups. Facilitators included centralized implementation at chain pharmacies, access to Web-based resources, regularly stocking naloxone, and use of naloxone-specific intake forms. Barriers included patient confidentiality concerns and payment/cost issues. Only 31% of surveyed pharmacists reported always providing naloxone counseling; the most commonly cited barriers were perceived patient discomfort (21%) and time limitations (14%). Confidential space was also more of a concern for independent (vs. chain) pharmacists (18% vs. 6%, P = 0.008). A majority of pharmacists held supportive attitudes toward naloxone, although some reported having moral/ethical concerns about naloxone provision. CONCLUSION: We documented several facilitators to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing. Areas for improvement include addressing stigma and misconceptions around opioids and naloxone use. These remain important targets for improving pharmacy-based naloxone dispensing, although our overall positive results suggest Massachusetts' experience with NSO implementation can inform other states' efforts to expand pharmacy-based naloxone access.

Mobile phone and internet use among people who inject drugs: Implications for mobile health interventions.

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) interventions have the potential to improve substance use treatment engagement and outcomes, and to reduce risk behaviors among people who inject drugs (PWID). However, there are few studies assessing mobile technology use among PWID and none have investigated continuity of mobile phone use. Methods: We surveyed 494 PWID. We used bivariate (independent-sample t- and chi-square tests) and multivariate (logistic regression) analyses to determine whether mobile phone and/or internet use differed as a function of participant- and/or injection-related characteristics. Results: Most participants (77%) had a mobile phone, with 67% having a phone that was free of charge. Participants with a phone were significantly less likely to be homeless (AOR = 0.28), to have shared syringes (AOR = 0.53), and to have reused syringes (AOR = 0.26) in the past 3 months. We observed high rates of phone and number turnover, with more than half reporting that they got a new phone (57%) and/or number (56%) at least once within the past 3 months. Most participants were familiar with using the internet (80% ever use), though participants who had ever used the internet were younger (AOR = 0.89), were less likely to be homeless (AOR = 0.38), were less likely to have shared syringes (AOR = 0.49), and were more likely to have injected methamphetamine by itself (AOR = 2.49) in the past 3 months. Conclusions: Overall, mobile technology and internet use was high among our sample of PWID. Several factors should be considered in recruiting diverse samples of PWID to minimize bias in mHealth study outcomes, including mobile phone access and protocol type (text- vs internet-based).

Consider the Source: Associations between Syringe Sources and Risky Injection Behaviors in California's Central Valley.

BACKGROUND: Sterile syringe access is critical to prevent serious viral and bacterial infections among people who inject drugs (PWID) but many areas across the United States lack sufficient access. Although California law allows nonprescription pharmacy syringe sales and syringe services programs (SSPs), access gaps remain in the largely rural Central Valley. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine syringe access and related injection behaviors among PWID in Fresno, California. METHODS: We used respondent driven sampling to recruit 494 individuals for a survey about syringe access and injection behaviors between April and September 2016. Participants were ≥18 years old and injected at least twice in the past 30 days. Descriptive statistics examined syringe access and logistic regression determined if discrete syringe source categories were significantly associated with syringe sharing and/or reuse. RESULTS: A majority (67%) obtained syringes from an authorized source; SSPs were most common (59%), while few reported pharmacy purchase (14%). Unauthorized sources were even more common (79%), primarily friends (64%) or someone on the street (37%). Compared to PWID who used only authorized sources, those using only unauthorized sources had a higher odds of syringe sharing (AOR = 3.40, 95% CI: 1.66, 6.95) and syringe reuse (AOR = 6.22; 95% CI: 2.24, 17.29), as did those who reported mixed sources (AOR = 3.78; 95% CI: 1.90, 7.54 and AOR = 4.64; 95% CI: 2.08, 10.35). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate a need to expand syringe access in nonurban California to prevent the syringe sharing and reuse that contributes to serious viral and bacterial infections among PWID.

Using Positive Empathy Interventions to Reduce Stigma Toward People Who Inject Drugs.

People who inject drugs are often the target of stigma that puts this already at-risk group at greater risk of harm. Past research has shown that holding stigmatizing views of people who inject drugs increases risky behaviors and is a barrier to their engagement in important medical and public health interventions. One explanation is that the negativity surrounding the group causes increased levels of anticipated emotional exhaustion, discouraging positive engagement. However, there has been minimal research focused on addressing this negativity to reduce levels of held stigma against people who inject drugs. We hypothesized that giving people an imagined positive contact exercise about people who inject would lead to a reduction in stigma, since exposure to positive empathy may create new mental associations between stigmatized groups and more positive emotions and experiences. Secondarily, we hypothesized that positive empathy strategies would be more effective than traditional informational or learning based techniques, and that the latter would be more effective than a control condition. Our sample consisted of 375 participants recruited online. Participants were assigned to one of three study conditions: a positive empathy condition, an informational learning condition, or a control condition, and completed a posttest social distance measure. Results demonstrated that subjects exposed to the positive empathy stigma reduction condition experienced a significant reduction in held stigma while participants exposed to traditional informational learning techniques showed no significant reduction in held stigma. Positive empathy-based stigma interventions should be further researched as a promising avenue to reduce the effects of drug-related stigma.