Feasibility of providing interventions for injection drug users in pharmacy settings: a case study among San Francisco pharmacists.

In addition to syringe exchange programs, pharmacies are important venues where injection drug users (IDUs) can access non-prescription syringes and other prevention interventions. This study assessed the feasibility of providing a range of interventions for IDUs in pharmacy settings. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 23 participants (policy makers, owner/managers, dispensing pharmacists, and pharmacy staff) from independent and chain/retail pharmacies in San Francisco, California, USA. The highest level of support was for a coupon syringe program and educational materials. Several overarching themes illustrate challenges to implementing pharmacy-based preventive interventions: time, space, sufficient staff, pharmacist training, legal considerations, pharmacist attitudes toward IDUs, and cost and reimbursement issues. This study provides concrete examples of the types of preventive services that pharmacists support and consider feasible, and illustrates that pharmacists welcome the opportunity to broaden their role as critical partners in public health matters related to injection drug use.

Evaluation of nonprescription syringe sales in San Francisco.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the experiences, practices, and challenges associated with nonprescription syringe sales (NPSS) among pharmacists whose pharmacies were enrolled in the Disease Prevention Demonstration Project in San Francisco, CA. METHODS: Self-administered survey mailed to 69 pharmacies and interviews with pharmacists and technicians. RESULTS: A total of 55 of 69 pharmacies (80%) returned the survey, and eight pharmacy managers and three pharmacy technicians were interviewed in person. Of pharmacists, 72% reported none or very few problems with NPSS in the previous year, although surveys and interviews illustrated challenges associated with NPSS in terms of time management, educating patients about syringe disposal, and understanding patient preferences for syringes. Of pharmacists, 62% reported NPSS to no more than 10 to 20 patients per week and 67% collected more than 400 syringes in the previous year. One-third of pharmacists perceived that their pharmacies were located in areas where drug activity was high and that the majority of NPSS patients injected illegal drugs. CONCLUSION: Access to sterile syringes is a prominent public health issue, and pharmacists can play an important role in injection drug user (IDU) education and disease prevention. This evaluation suggests that pharmacies are selling nonprescription syringes to individuals perceived to be IDUs with no major problems. Additional evaluations from health department programs are needed to demonstrate the efficacy of NPSS in California.

Non-prescription syringe sales in California: a qualitative examination of practices among 12 local health jurisdictions.

Legislation permitting non-prescription syringe sales (NPSS) was passed in 2004 in California as a structural intervention designed to expand access to syringes for injection drug users. As of December 2009, 19 of California's 61 local health jurisdictions (LHJs) have approved policies to authorize pharmacies to sell non-prescription syringes. The legislation faces termination in 2010 if current evaluation efforts fail to demonstrate outcomes defined in the legislation. Using qualitative methods, we examined the systems and procedures associated with implementation; identified facilitators and barriers to implementation among 12 LHJs, and documented the role of public health in initiating and sustaining local programs. We identified consistent activities that led to policy implementation among LHJs and discovered several barriers that were associated with failure to implement local programs. Factors leading to NPSS were public health leadership; an inclusive planning process, marketing the program as a public health initiative; learning from others' efforts, successes, and failures; and identifying acceptable syringe disposal options in advance of program implementation. Health departments that were confronted with political and moral arguments lost momentum and ultimately assigned a lower priority to the initiative citing the loss of powerful public health advocates or a lack of human resources. Additional barriers were law enforcement, elected officials, and pharmacy opposition, and failure to resolve syringe disposal options to the satisfaction of important stakeholders. The lessons learned in this study should provide useful guidance for the remaining LHJs in California without NPSS programs.

Primary and secondary analysis of local elected officials' decisions to support or oppose pharmacy sale of syringes in California.

Under California law, local governments may authorize pharmacies within their jurisdictions to sell ten or fewer syringes to an adult without prescription, proof of identity, or proof of medical need. Local governments may simultaneously exempt adults from prosecution for violation of state drug paraphernalia codes for possession of ten or fewer syringes for personal use. Both of these provisions are temporary and sunset on December 31, 2010, unless subsequent state legislation amends that date. The objective of our study was to ascertain how and why local policymakers made their decisions regarding non-prescription syringe sale (NPSS). We examined influences on their decisions, including specific messengers and the arguments that were most salient to their decision making. We selected jurisdictions that were geographically representative of California counties; those with and without syringe exchange programs, and those that had passed or rejected NPSS. We conducted nine semi-structured interviews in five jurisdictions. To enrich primary data collection, we analyzed secondary data by reviewing audio, video, and written transcripts of public hearings and newspaper coverage in five jurisdictions, including three jurisdictions without primary interview data. Among proponents of NPSS, we identified common themes, including: (1) public health research provided conclusive evidence for reduction in HIV and hepatitis transmission without problems of crime, drug use, or unsafe discard of syringes; (2) the local health officer was the key to influencing local policymakers; (3) recall of prior debates over syringe exchange served to inform their decision making; and (4) a lack of local opposition or controversy. Common concerns among opponents of NPSS included: (1) that there would be an increase in unsafe discard of syringes; (2) loss of an important law enforcement tool; (3) that drug users were incapable of desired behavior change; and (4) that research was inconclusive, or proved that syringe access would not work in reducing rates of disease. Themes held in common by proponents and opponents of NPSS were identified as well. Syringe access through NPSS is in fact supported by a robust body of public health research and is considered an important component of a comprehensive strategy to reduce HIV and hepatitis transmission. Our study highlights the importance of understanding the perspectives of elected officials in order to ameliorate their concerns without undermining the public health goal of reducing death, disease, and suffering in at-risk communities.

Assessing the feasibility of harm reduction services for MSM: the late night breakfast buffet study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the leveling off in new HIV infections among men who have sex with men (MSM) in San Francisco, new evidence suggests that many recent HIV infections are linked with the use of Methamphetamine (MA). Among anonymous HIV testers in San Francisco, HIV incidence among MA users was 6.3% compared to 2.1% among non-MA users. Of particular concern for prevention programs are frequent users and HIV positive men who use MA. These MSM pose a particular challenge to HIV prevention efforts due to the need to reach them during very late night hours. METHODS: The purpose of the Late Night Breakfast Buffet (LNBB) was to determine the feasibility and uptake of harm reduction services by a late night population of MSM. The "buffet" of services included: needle exchange, harm reduction information, oral HIV testing, and urine based sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing accompanied by counseling and consent procedures. The study had two components: harm reduction outreach and a behavioral survey. For 4 months during 2004, we provided van-based harm reduction services in three neighborhoods in San Francisco from 1-5 a.m. for anyone out late at night. We also administered a behavioral risk and service utilization survey among MSM. RESULTS: We exchanged 2000 needles in 233 needle exchange visits, distributed 4500 condoms/lubricants and provided 21 HIV tests and 12 STI tests. Fifty-five MSM enrolled in the study component. The study population of MSM was characterized by low levels of income and education whose ages ranged from 18-55. Seventy-eight percent used MA in the last 3 months; almost 25% used MA every day in the same time frame. Of the 65% who ever injected, 97% injected MA and 13% injected it several times a day. MA and alcohol were strong influences in the majority of unprotected sexual encounters among both HIV negative and HIV positive MSM. CONCLUSION: We reached a disenfranchised population of MA-using MSM who are at risk for acquiring or transmitting HIV infection through multiple high risk behaviors, and we established the feasibility and acceptability of late night harm reduction for MSM and MSM who inject drugs.

Do community planning groups (CPGs) influence HIV prevention policy? An analysis of California CPGs.

Since 1994, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has required its 65 public health department grantees to develop and implement a collaborative planning process with their state and local communities as a condition of continued HIV prevention funding. The HIV prevention community planning process offers an unprecedented opportunity for important changes in HIV prevention policy and governmental systems change through local citizen action. We examined the perceptions and experiences of members of community planning groups (CPGs) with respect to systems change and policy making in HIV prevention and identified a series of factors that either promote or inhibit systems and policy change by CPGs. Although there is reportedly substantial support from public health departments for policy making by CPGs, no official guidance supports these activities. CPGs in California have made profound changes in government systems and these experiences position them for policy making in HIV prevention.