What should be measured to assess the quality of community-based palliative care? Results from a collaborative expert workshop.

OBJECTIVES: The need for palliative care (PC) will continue to increase in Canada with population aging. Many older adults prefer to "age in place" and receive care in their own homes. Currently, there is a lack of standardized quality indicators (QIs) for PC delivered in the community in Canada. METHODS: A one-day workshop collected expert opinions on what should be measured to capture quality PC. Three brainstorming sessions were focused on addressing the following questions: (1) what is important to measure to support quality PC, regardless of setting? (2) Of the identified measures, are any of special importance to care provided in the home? (3) What are the challenges, barriers, and opportunities for creating these measures? The National Consensus Project (NCP) for Quality Palliative Care framework was used as a guide to group together important comments into key themes. RESULTS: The experts identified four themes that are important for measuring quality, regardless of care setting, including access to care in the community by a multidisciplinary team, care for the individual with PC needs, support for the informal caregiver (e.g., family, friends), and symptom management for individuals with PC needs. Two additional themes were of special importance to measuring quality PC in the home, including spiritual care for individuals with PC needs and home as the preferred place of death. The challenges, barriers, and potential opportunities to these quality issues were also discussed. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: PC experts, through this collaborative process, made a substantial contribution to the creation of a standardized set of QIs for community-based PC. Having a standardized set of QIs will enable health care professionals and decision makers to target areas for improvement, implement interventions to improve the quality of care, and ultimately, optimize the health and well-being of individuals with a serious illness.

Rural-Urban Differences in Changes and Effects of Tobacco 21 in Youth E-cigarette Use.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of current electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use has increased dramatically among US youth. It is unknown how the impact of policies to curb e-cigarette use might differ across rural and urban areas. METHODS: Data were collected from an annual statewide survey of middle and high school students in Kansas. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to examine the temporal change in current e-cigarette use in 2018 and 2019 across rural and urban areas and across the areas with and without a Tobacco 21 (T21) policy that raises the minimum age of tobacco sales to 21 years. RESULTS: Of 132 803 participants, the prevalence of current e-cigarette use increased from 8.2% in 2018 to 12.6% in 2019. The increase was larger in rural areas (from 6.7% in 2018 to 13.4% in 2019, difference = 6.7%) than in urban areas (9.8%-11.9%, difference = 2.1%), with a significant interaction effect of year × urbanicity/T21 group (P < .0001). In urban areas, e-cigarette use increased significantly for middle school students in T21 areas (3.3%-4.5%; P = .01) and all students in non-T21 areas (8.1%-12.0%; P < .0001). In rural areas, the increase in e-cigarette use was significant in both T21 and non-T21 areas for all students, but the increase was smaller in T21 (7.9%-10.8%, difference = 3.0%) than in non-T21 areas (6.5%-13.7%, difference = 7.1%). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we reported marked disparities in the increase of youth e-cigarette use, with a larger recent increase in rural than in urban areas. T21 policies appear to mitigate these increases in both rural and urban youth.

Youth Knowledge of Tobacco 21 and its Association With Intention to Use Tobacco.

BACKGROUND: Raising the minimum legal age (MLA) of tobacco sales from 18 to 21 (Tobacco 21 [T21]) has recently been implemented nationwide as a method to reduce tobacco use, but empirical data on youth knowledge of T21 policies and related pathways to tobacco use are limited. METHODS: Data were collected from the 2018 Kansas Communities That Care Student Survey. Knowledge of the MLA was compared between T21 and non-T21 regions using a quasi-experimental design. Logistic regression and mediation analysis were conducted to assess the association between knowledge of the MLA, influencing factors, and intention to use tobacco. RESULTS: Of 16 949 students (aged between 11 and 18) completing the T21 survey, fewer students responded correctly about the MLA in T21 than in non-T21 regions (37.4% vs. 46.3% responded correctly, 27.6% vs. 24.2% responded incorrectly, respectively). In T21 regions, Hispanics and students who support T21 were more likely to respond correctly about the MLA. Among current non-tobacco users in T21 regions, students who responded correctly about the MLA were less likely to report intention to use tobacco (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.6-0.8]) than those who responded incorrectly. The pathway from knowledge of the MLA to intention to use tobacco was significantly mediated by increased support for T21 (p = .002), perceived difficulty in accessing cigarettes (p = .042), and reduced susceptibility to peer influence (p = .027). CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of the MLA was inversely associated with intention to use tobacco among youth. Educational campaigns to raise awareness and support for T21 among youth may improve the impact of T21 policies. IMPLICATIONS: This study examined youth knowledge of the MLA to purchase tobacco products, and whether knowledge of the MLA was associated with reduced intention to use tobacco. It also examined other influencing factors (eg, perceived support for T21) and potential mediation pathways linking knowledge of the MLA with intention to use tobacco. Given the nationwide adoption of T21, educational campaigns to promote knowledge of the policy may improve its impact.

Recognizing Psychiatric Comorbidity With Reading Disorders.

Reading disorder (RD), a specific learning disorder (SLD) of reading that includes impairment in word reading, reading fluency, and/or reading comprehension, is common in the general population but often is not comprehensively understood or assessed in mental health settings. In education settings, comorbid mental and associated disorders may be inadequately integrated into intervention plans. Assessment and intervention for RD may be delayed or absent in children with frequently co-occurring mental disorders not fully responding to treatment in both school and mental health settings. To address this oversight, this review summarizes current knowledge regarding RDs and common comorbid or co-occurring disorders that are important for mental health and school settings. We chose to highlight RD because it is the most common SLD, and connections to other often comorbid disorders have been more thoroughly described in the literature. Much of the literature we describe is on decoding-based RD (or developmental dyslexia) as it is the most common form of RD. In addition to risk for academic struggle and social, emotional, and behavioral problems, those with RD often show early evidence of combined or intertwined Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition childhood disorders. These include attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, disruptive, impulse-control, and conduct disorders, autism spectrum disorders, and other SLDs. The present review highlights issues and areas of controversy within these comorbidities, as well as directions for future research. An interdisciplinary, integrated approach between mental health professionals and educators can lead to comprehensive and targeted treatments encompassing both academic and mental health interventions. Such targeted treatments may contribute to improved educational and health-related outcomes in vulnerable youth. While there is a growing research literature on this association, more studies are needed of when to intervene and of the early and long-term benefits of comprehensive intervention.

Transferring Patients From Methadone to Buprenorphine: The Feasibility and Evaluation of Practice Guidelines.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Transfer from methadone to buprenorphine is problematic for many opioid-dependent patients, with limited documented evidence or practical clinical guidance, particularly for the range of methadone doses routinely prescribed for most patients (>50 mg). This study aimed to implement and evaluate recent national Australian guidelines for transferring patients from methadone to buprenorphine. DESIGN AND METHODS: A multisite prospective cohort study. Participants were patients who transferred from methadone to buprenorphine-naloxone at 1 of 4 specialist addiction centers in Australia and New Zealand. Clinicians were trained in the guidelines, and medical records were reviewed to examine process (eg, transfer setting, doses, and guideline adherence) and safety (precipitated withdrawal) measures. Participants completed research interviews before and after transfer-assessing changes in substance use, health outcomes, and side effects. RESULTS: In all, 33 participants underwent transfer, 9 from low methadone doses (<30 mg), 9 from medium doses (30-50 mg), and 15 from high doses (>50 mg). The majority of high-dose transfers occurred in inpatient settings. There was reasonable guideline adherence, and no complications identified in the low and medium-dose transfers. Three high-dose transfers (20%) experienced precipitated withdrawal, and 7/33 participants (21%) returned to methadone within 1 week of attempted transfer. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Transfer is feasible in outpatient settings for those transferring from methadone doses below 50 mg; however, inpatient settings and specialist supervision is recommended for higher-dose transfers. The Australian clinical guidelines appear safe and feasible, although further research is required to optimize high-dose transfer procedures.

Epidural Labor Analgesia-Fentanyl Dose and Breastfeeding Success: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding is an important public health concern. High cumulative doses of epidural fentanyl administered for labor analgesia have been reported to be associated with early termination of breastfeeding. We tested the hypothesis that breastfeeding success is adversely influenced by the cumulative epidural fentanyl dose administered for labor analgesia. METHODS: The study was a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of parous women at greater than 38 weeks gestation who planned to breastfeed, had successfully breastfed a prior infant, and who received neuraxial labor analgesia. Participants were randomized to receive one of three epidural maintenance solutions for labor analgesia (bupivacaine 1 mg/ml, bupivacaine 0.8 mg/ml with fentanyl 1 µg/ml, or bupivacaine 0.625 mg/ml with fentanyl 2 µg/ml). The primary outcome was the proportion of women breastfeeding at 6 weeks postpartum. Maternal and umbilical venous blood fentanyl and bupivacaine concentration at delivery were measured. RESULTS: A total of 345 women were randomized and 305 had complete data for analysis. The frequency of breastfeeding at 6 weeks was 97, 98, and 94% in the groups receiving epidural fentanyl 0, 1, and 2 µg/ml, respectively (P = 0.34). The cumulative fentanyl dose (difference: 37 µg [95% CI of the difference, -58 to 79 µg], P = 0.28) and maternal and umbilical cord venous fentanyl and bupivacaine concentrations did not differ between women who discontinued breastfeeding and those who were still breastfeeding at 6 weeks postpartum. CONCLUSIONS: Labor epidural solutions containing fentanyl concentrations as high as 2 µg/ml do not appear to influence breastfeeding rates at 6 weeks postpartum.

Diversion and injection of buprenorphine-naloxone film two years post-introduction in Australia.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: We report 2 years of post-marketing surveillance of the diversion and injection of buprenorphine-naloxone (BNX) film following its introduction in 2011. DESIGN AND METHODS: Interviews were conducted with people who inject drugs regularly (PWID) (2004-2013), opioid substitution therapy clients (2013, n = 492) and key experts (n = 44). Key outcomes were unsanctioned removal of supervised doses, diversion, injection and street price. Prevalence of past 6-month injection among PWID was adjusted for background availability of opioid substitution therapy medications using sales data. RESULTS: Among out-of-treatment PWID, the levels of regular (weekly+) BNX film injection were comparable to methadone and BNX tablets, and lower than mono-buprenorphine, adjusting for background availability. Fewer BNX film clients [3%; 95% (CI) 1-5] regularly injected their medication than mono-buprenorphine clients (25%; 95% CI 11-39), but at levels equivalent to those among methadone (3%; 95% CI 1-6) and BNX tablet clients (2%; 95% CI 0-6). Key experts perceived BNX film needed less supervised dosing time as it dissolved rapidly and was harder to remove from the mouth than sublingual tablets; however, removal of supervised doses was higher among BNX film clients (15%; 95% CI: 10-20) than methadone clients (3%; 95% CI 1-6), and not significantly different from BNX tablet (11%; 95% CI 2-21) and mono-buprenorphine clients (31%; 95% CI 16-46). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Two years post-introduction, levels of BNX film diversion and injection remained comparable with those for methadone and BNX tablets, and lower than mono-buprenorphine. We found no evidence that BNX film has lower non-adherence and diversion than the tablet formulation. [Larance B, Mattick R, Ali R, Lintzeris N, Jenkinson R, White N, Kihas I, Cassidy R, Degenhardt L. Diversion and injection of buprenorphine-naloxone film two years post-introduction in Australia. Drug Alcohol Rev 2015].

The extramedical use and diversion of opioid substitution medications and other medications in prison settings in Australia following the introduction of buprenorphine-naloxone film.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Around 65% of people incarcerated in prisons in Australia, America and Europe have a history of drug dependence, sometimes treated with opioid substitution treatment (OST) medications. Studies report that those in treatment in prison do engage in some level of diversion to others, whether on a voluntary or coerced basis. We aimed to examine the use of prescribed and non-prescribed OST medications by those in prisons, especially buprenorphine-naloxone film (BNX-F); the extent of non-adherence and diversion and reasons for such practices; and the impact of the introduction of BNX-F into the prison system. DESIGN AND METHODS: Mixed methods study drawing on: (i) structured interviews with current OST clients (n = 60) who reported being incarcerated in the 12 months prior to being interviewed and (ii) qualitative interviews with key experts working in corrections and prison (or justice) health settings. RESULTS: The majority were prescribed OST medications in prison, with 25% removing all or part of their supervised dose on at least one occasion, and 44% reporting use of non-prescribed medications. Some reported intravenous use (14% injected). One-third of OST recipients reported selling/sharing OST medications with others in prison. The introduction of BNX-F into the prison system saw different diversion methods used and removal from dosing within prison. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Despite prison being a highly regulated and controlled environment, some level of diversion and sharing of psychoactive medication occurs among prisoners. The buprenorphine formulations used in OST present particular challenges with respect to supervised dosing in this setting. [White N, Ali R, Larance B, Zador D, Mattick RP, Degenhardt L. The extramedical use and diversion of opioid substitution medications and other medications in prison settings in Australia following the introduction of buprenorphine-naloxone film. Drug Alcohol Rev 2015;●●:●●-●●].

The characteristics of a cohort who tamper with prescribed and diverted opioid medications.

AIMS: To describe the methods and baseline characteristics of a cohort of people who tamper with pharmaceutical opioids, formed to examine changes in opioid use following introduction of Reformulated OxyContin®. METHODS: Participants were 606 people from three Australian jurisdictions who reported past month injecting, snorting, chewing or smoking of a pharmaceutical opioid and had engaged in these practices at least monthly in the past 6 months. Baseline interviews were conducted prior to introduction of Reformulated OxyContin® in April 2014. Patterns of opioid use and cohort characteristics were examined according to whether participants were prescribed opioid medications, or exclusively used diverted medication. RESULTS: The cohort reported high levels of moderate/severe depression (61%), moderate/severe anxiety (43%), post-traumatic stress disorder (42%), chronic pain or disability (past 6 months, 54%) and pain (past month, 47%). Lifetime use of oxycodone, morphine, opioid substitution medications and codeine were common. Three-quarters (77%) reported ICD-10 lifetime pharmaceutical opioid dependence and 40% current heroin dependence. Thirteen percent reported past year overdose, and 70% reported at least one past month opioid injection-related injury or disease. The cohort displayed complex clinical profiles, but participants currently receiving opioid substitution therapy who were also prescribed other opioids particularly reported a wide range of risk behaviors, despite their health service engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the heterogeneity in the patterns and clinical correlates of opioid use among people who tamper with pharmaceutical opioids. Targeted health interventions are essential to reduce the associated harms.

Methods and predictors of tampering with a tamper-resistant controlled-release oxycodone formulation.

BACKGROUND: In April 2014, a tamper-resistant controlled-release oxycodone formulation was introduced into the Australian market. This study aimed to identify the level and methods of tampering with reformulated oxycodone, demographic and clinical characteristics of those who reported tampering with reformulated oxycodone, and perceived attractiveness of original and reformulated oxycodone for misuse (via tampering). METHODS: A prospective cohort of 522 people who regularly tampered with pharmaceutical opioids and had tampered with the original oxycodone product in their lifetime completed two interviews before (January-March 2014: Wave 1) and after (May-August 2014: Wave 2) introduction of reformulated oxycodone. RESULTS: Four-fifths (81%) had tampered with the original oxycodone formulation in the month prior to Wave 1; use and attempted tampering with reformulated oxycodone amongst the sample was comparatively low at Wave 2 (29% and 19%, respectively). Reformulated oxycodone was primarily swallowed (15%), with low levels of recent successful injection (6%), chewing (2%), drinking/dissolving (1%), and smoking (<1%). Participants who tampered with original and reformulated oxycodone were socio-demographically and clinically similar to those who had only tampered with the original formulation, except the former were more likely to report prescribed oxycodone use and stealing pharmaceutical opioid, and less likely to report moderate/severe anxiety. There was significant diversity in the methods for tampering, with attempts predominantly prompted by self-experimentation (rather than informed by word-of-mouth or the internet). Participants rated reformulated oxycodone as more difficult to prepare and inject and less pleasant to use compared to the original formulation. CONCLUSION: Current findings suggest that the introduction of the tamper-resistant product has been successful at reducing, although not necessarily eliminating, tampering with the controlled-release oxycodone formulation, with lower attractiveness for misuse. Appropriate, effective treatment options must be available with increasing availability of abuse-deterrent products, given the reduction of oxycodone tampering and use amongst a group with high rates of pharmaceutical opioid dependence.

Injecting buprenorphine-naloxone film: Findings from an explorative qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Experiences of buprenorphine-naloxone (BNX) sublingual film injection are not well documented or understood. We examined how people who inject BNX film seek and share information about this practice, document the methods used to prepare BNX film for injection, and report participants' experiences of this practice. DESIGN AND METHODS: Interviews were (n = 16) conducted with people who indicated that they had injected BNX film since its introduction onto the Australian market. Semistructured interviews were recorded and transcribed. NVivo10 program (QSR International) was used to analyse the data using qualitative description methodology. RESULTS: Participants largely reported similar BNX film preparation techniques, although the texture of BNX film during preparation to inject was reported to be unusual (gluggy), and there were many varied accounts associated with the amount of water used. Physical harms reported as associated with injecting BNX film were described (including local and systemic issues); participants reported injecting the film to enhance its immediate effects, yet generally reported that sublingual administration provided longer-lasting effects. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Understanding knowledge acquisition about injecting new formulations of opioid substitution therapy is crucial in developing more effective harm-reduction strategies. Dissemination by peer networks to those who are currently or planning to inject BNX film regarding the 'gelatine like' texture when mixing, using only cold water and double filtering is important to ensure safer injecting practices. Findings from this study highlight the importance of peer networks for the dissemination of harm-reduction information. Introduction of new formulations internationally requires more qualitative studies to inform safer practices.

Jurisdictional differences in opioid use, other licit and illicit drug use, and harms associated with substance use among people who tamper with pharmaceutical opioids.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The harms associated with non-medical use of pharmaceutical opioid analgesics are well established; however, less is known about the characteristics and drug-use patterns of the growing and hidden populations of people using pharmaceutical opioids illicitly, including the frequency of pharmaceutical opioid injection. This paper aimed to undertake a detailed examination of jurisdictional differences in patterns of opioid use among a cohort of people who regularly tamper with pharmaceutical opioids in Australia. DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were drawn from the National Opioid Medications Abuse Deterrence study. The cohort was recruited from New South Wales (NSW; n = 303), South Australia (SA; n = 150) and Tasmania (TAS; n = 153) to participate in face-to-face structured interviews collecting data on use of pharmaceutical opioids, benzodiazepines, other sedative drugs and illicit substances, as well as the harms associated with substance use. RESULTS: TAS participants reported greater use and injection of certain pharmaceutical opioids (particularly morphine and methadone tablets), and limited heroin use, with lower rates of engagement in opioid substitution treatment, compared with NSW participants. NSW participants were more socially disadvantaged and more likely to report risky injecting behaviours and injecting-related injuries and diseases compared with SA and TAS participants. SA participants reported greater rates of pain conditions, greater use of pain-based services, as well as broader use of pharmaceutical opioids in regards to forms and route of administration, compared with NSW participants. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Distinct jurisdictional profiles were evident for people who tamper with pharmaceutical opioids, potentially reflecting jurisdictional differences in prescribing regulatory mechanisms and addiction treatment models.

The introduction of buprenorphine-naloxone film in opioid substitution therapy in Australia: Uptake and issues arising from changing buprenorphine formulations.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Buprenorphine-naloxone (BNX) film for opioid dependence treatment was introduced in Australia in 2011. A key difference in State policy approaches saw transfer from BNX tablets to BNX film mandated in South Australia (SA) with New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria (VIC) having less stringent policies. This study examined (i) how initiations and transfers were implemented, (ii) the profile and predictors of adverse effects as self-reported by BNX film clients, and (iii) dosing issues. DESIGN AND METHODS: Survey of 334 buprenorphine (BPN), BNX tablet and BNX film clients and semi-structured interviews with 39 key experts (KEs) in 2012. Comparisons are made between clients interviewed in SA versus NSW and VIC combined. RESULTS: Among the 180 current BNX film clients, 23% started treatment on BNX film, 18% requested a transfer to BNX film and 59% (n = 106) reported their clinic/prescriber recommended transfer to BNX film. Among clients who were offered but refused a transfer to BNX film (n = 66), the most common reason was 'I am happy with my current treatment and do not see a reason to change' (53%). Some opioid substitution therapy clients and KE viewed transfers as 'forced' (i.e. no choice of buprenorphine formulation). Multivariable regression showed residing in SA (vs. NSW/VIC) and a shorter length of current treatment episode were associated with more BNX film-attributed adverse effects but clinic/prescriber-recommended transfer was not. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of BNX film in Australia varied across States. A perception of restricted choice in medication may have undermined initial acceptance in SA.

Cost analysis of a nucleic acid amplification test in the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis at an urban hospital with a high prevalence of TB/HIV.

INTRODUCTION: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has recommended using a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for diagnosing pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) but there is a lack of data on NAAT cost-effectiveness. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study that included all patients with an AFB smear-positive respiratory specimen at Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, GA, USA between January 2002 and June 2008. We determined the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of a commercially available and FDA-approved NAAT (amplified MTD, Gen-Probe) compared to the gold standard of culture. A cost analysis was performed and included costs related to laboratory tests, hospital charges, anti-TB medications, and contact investigations. Average cost per patient was calculated under two conditions: (1) using a NAAT on all AFB smear-postive respiratory specimens and (2) not using a NAAT. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine sensitivity of cost difference to reasonable ranges of model inputs. RESULTS: During a 6 1/2 year study period, there were 1,009 patients with an AFB smear-positive respiratory specimen at our public urban hospital. We found the NAAT to be highly sensitive (99.6%) and specific (99.1%) on AFB smear-positive specimens compared to culture. Overall, the positive predictive value (PPV) of an AFB smear-positive respiratory specimen for culture-confirmed TB was 27%. The PPV of an AFB smear-positive respiratory specimen for culture-confirmed TB was significantly higher for HIV-uninfected persons compared to those who were HIV-seropositive (152/271 [56%] vs. 85/445 [19%]; RR = 2.94, 95% CI 2.36-3.65, p<0.001). The cost savings of using the NAAT was $2,003 per AFB smear-positive case. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of the NAAT on AFB smear-positive respiratory specimens was highly cost-saving in our setting at a U.S. urban public hospital with a high prevalence of TB and HIV because of the low PPV of an AFB smear for culture-confirmed TB.

The diversion and injection of a buprenorphine-naloxone soluble film formulation.

BACKGROUND: We compared the diversion and injection of a new formulation of buprenorphine, a buprenorphine-naloxone film product (BNX film), with buprenorphine-naloxone tablets (BNX tablets), mono-buprenorphine (BPN) and methadone (MET) in Australia. METHODS: Surveys were conducted with people who inject drugs regularly (PWID) (2004-2012) and opioid substitution treatment (OST) clients (2012, N=543). Key outcome measures: the unsanctioned removal of supervised doses, diversion, injection, motivations, drug liking and street price. Levels of injection among PWID were adjusted for background availability of medication using sales data. Doses not taken as directed by OST clients were adjusted by total number of daily doses dispensed. RESULTS: Among out-of-treatment PWID, levels of injection for BNX film were comparable to those for MET and BNX tablet formulations, adjusting for background availability; BPN injecting levels were higher. Among OST clients, recent injecting of one's medication was similar among clients in all OST types; weekly or more frequent injection of prescribed doses was reported by fewer BNX film clients (3%; 95% CI: 1-6) than BPN clients (11%; 95% CI: 3-17), but at levels similar to those observed among MET and BNX tablet clients. The proportion of BNX film doses injected was lower than that for BPN and BNX tablets, and equivalent to that for MET. The majority of BNX film doses injected by OST clients were unsupervised doses, although some injection of supervised doses of BNX film did occur. The median price of all buprenorphine forms on the illicit market was the same. CONCLUSIONS: Non-adherence and diversion of the BNX film formulation was similar to MET and BNX tablet formulations; BPN had higher levels of all indicators of non-adherence and diversion.