Vaccines as Immunotherapies for Substance Use Disorders.

Substance use disorders (SUD) present a worldwide challenge with few effective therapies except for the relative efficacy of opioid pharmacotherapies, despite limited treatment access. However, the proliferation of illicit fentanyl use initiated a dramatic and cascading epidemic of lethal overdoses. This rise in fentanyl overdoses regenerated an interest in vaccine immunotherapy, which, despite an optimistic start in animal models over the past 50 years, yielded disappointing results in human clinical trials of vaccines against nicotine, stimulants (cocaine and methamphetamine), and opioids. After a brief review of clinical and selected preclinical vaccine studies, the "lessons learned" from the previous vaccine clinical trials are summarized, and then the newest challenge of a vaccine against fentanyl and its analogs is explored. Animal studies have made significant advances in vaccine technology for SUD treatment over the past 50 years, and the resulting anti-fentanyl vaccines show remarkable promise for ending this epidemic of fentanyl deaths.

Physiologic oxygen responses to smoking opioids: an observational study using continuous pulse oximetry at overdose prevention services in British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: In British Columbia, Canada, smoking is the most common modality of drug use among people who die of opioid toxicity. We aimed to assess oxygen saturation (SpO2) while people smoked opioids during a pilot study that introduced continuous pulse oximetry at overdose prevention services (OPS) sites. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study, using a participatory design. We implemented our monitoring protocol from March to August 2021 at four OPS. We included adults (≥ 18 years) presenting to smoke opioids. A sensor taped to participants' fingers transmitted real-time SpO2 readings to a remote monitor viewed by OPS staff. Peer researchers collected baseline data and observed the timing of participants' inhalations. We analyzed SpO2 on a per-event basis. In mixed-effects logistic regression models, drop in minimum SpO2 ≤ 90% in the current minute was our main outcome variable. Inhalation in that same minute was our main predictor. We also examined inhalation in the previous minute, cumulative inhalations, inhalation rate, demographics, co-morbidities, and substance use variables. RESULTS: We recorded 599 smoking events; 72.8% (436/599) had analyzable SpO2 data. Participants' mean age was 38.6 years (SD 11.3 years) and 73.1% were male. SpO2 was highly variable within and between individuals. Drop in SpO2 ≤ 90% was not significantly associated with inhalation in that same minute (OR: 1.2 [0.8-1.78], p = 0.261) or inhalation rate (OR 0.47 [0.20-1.10], p = 0.082). There was an association of SpO2 drop with six cumulative inhalations (OR 3.38 [1.04-11.03], p = 0.043); this was not maintained ≥ 7 inhalations. Demographics, co-morbidities, and drug use variables were non-contributory. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous pulse oximetry SpO2 monitoring is a safe adjunct to monitoring people who smoke opioids at OPS. Our data reflect challenges of real-world monitoring, indicating that greater supports are needed for frontline responders at OPS. Inconsistent association between inhalations and SpO2 suggests that complex factors (e.g., inhalation depth/duration, opioid tolerance, drug use setting) contribute to hypoxemia and overdose risk while people smoke opioids.

How do we understand the value of drug checking as a component of harm reduction services? A qualitative exploration of client and provider perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Mortality related to opioid overdose in the U.S. has risen sharply in the past decade. In California, opioid overdose death rates more than tripled from 2018 to 2021, and deaths from synthetic opioids such as fentanyl increased more than seven times in those three years alone. Heightened attention to this crisis has attracted funding and programming opportunities for prevention and harm reduction interventions. Drug checking services offer people who use drugs the opportunity to test the chemical content of their own supply, but are not widely used in North America. We report on qualitative data from providers and clients of harm reduction and drug checking services, to explore how these services are used, experienced, and considered. METHODS: We conducted in-depth semi-structured key informant interviews across two samples of drug checking stakeholders: "clients" (individuals who use drugs and receive harm reduction services) and "providers" (subject matter experts and those providing clinical and harm reduction services to people who use drugs). Provider interviews were conducted via Zoom from June-November, 2022. Client interviews were conducted in person in San Francisco over a one-week period in November 2022. Data were analyzed following the tenets of thematic analysis. RESULTS: We found that the value of drug checking includes but extends well beyond overdose prevention. Participants discussed ways that drug checking can fill a regulatory vacuum, serve as a tool of informal market regulation at the community level, and empower public health surveillance systems and clinical response. We present our findings within three key themes: (1) the role of drug checking in overdose prevention; (2) benefits to the overall agency, health, and wellbeing of people who use drugs; and (3) impacts of drug checking services at the community and systems levels. CONCLUSION: This study contributes to growing evidence of the effectiveness of drug checking services in mitigating risks associated with substance use, including overdose, through enabling people who use and sell drugs to test their own supply. It further contributes to discussions around the utility of drug checking and harm reduction, in order to inform legislation and funding allocation.

High-dose naloxone formulations are not as essential as we thought.

Naloxone is an effective FDA-approved opioid antagonist for reversing opioid overdoses. Naloxone is available to the public and can be administered through intramuscular (IM), intravenous (IV), and intranasal spray (IN) routes. Our literature review investigates the adequacy of two doses of standard IM or IN naloxone in reversing fentanyl overdoses compared to newer high-dose naloxone formulations. Moreover, our initiative incorporates the experiences of people who use drugs, enabling a more practical and contextually-grounded analysis. The evidence indicates that the vast majority of fentanyl overdoses can be successfully reversed using two standard IM or IN dosages. Exceptions include cases of carfentanil overdose, which necessitates ≥ 3 doses for reversal. Multiple studies documented the risk of precipitated withdrawal using ≥ 2 doses of naloxone, notably including the possibility of recurring overdose symptoms after resuscitation, contingent upon the half-life of the specific opioid involved. We recommend distributing multiple doses of standard IM or IN naloxone to bystanders and educating individuals on the adequacy of two doses in reversing fentanyl overdoses. Individuals should continue administration until the recipient is revived, ensuring appropriate intervals between each dose along with rescue breaths, and calling emergency medical services if the individual is unresponsive after two doses. We do not recommend high-dose naloxone formulations as a substitute for four doses of IM or IN naloxone due to the higher cost, risk of precipitated withdrawal, and limited evidence compared to standard doses. Future research must take into consideration lived and living experience, scientific evidence, conflicts of interest, and the bodily autonomy of people who use drugs.

"It didn't hurt me": patients' and providers' perspectives on unsupervised take-home doses, drug diversion, and overdose risks in the provision of medication for opioid use disorder during COVID-19 in San Juan, Puerto Rico.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, clinics offering medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) needed to rapidly introduce unsupervised take-home dosing, while relapsing patients and patients unable to enter treatment faced increased risks of fentanyl-related overdose deaths and other drug-related harms. Based on a qualitative study of people who inject drugs (PWID) receiving MOUD treatment and MOUD staff in Puerto Rico, this paper documents the lived experiences of patients and providers during this period and the risk perceptions and management strategies to address substance misuse and drug diversion attributable to unsupervised take-home-dose delivery. METHODS: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with patients (N = 25) and staff (N = 25) in two clinics providing MOUD in San Juan, Puerto Rico, during 2022. Patients and staff were receiving or providing treatment during the pandemic, and patients reported injection drug use during the past thirty days. RESULTS: Patients were overwhelmingly male (84%), unmarried (72%), and unemployed (52%), with almost half (44%) injecting one to three times a day. Mean time in treatment was 7 years. Staff had a mean age of 46 years with more than half of the sample (63%) female. The majority of patients believed that unsupervised take-home dosing had no significant effect on their treatment adherence or engagement. In contrast, providers expressed concerns over the potential for drug diversion and possible increased risks of patient attrition, overdose episodes, and poor treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study underscores the importance of insider perspectives on harm-reduction changes in policy implemented during a health crisis. Of note is the finding that staff disagreed among themselves regarding the potential harms of diversion and changes in drug testing protocols. These different perspectives are important to address so that future pandemic policies are successfully designed and implemented. Our study also illuminates disagreement in risk assessments between patients and providers. This suggests that preparation for emergency treatment plans requires enhanced communication with patients to match treatments to the context of lived experience.

Is a randomised controlled trial of take home naloxone distributed in emergency settings likely to be feasible and acceptable? Findings from a UK qualitative study exploring perspectives of people who use opioids and emergency services staff.

OBJECTIVE: Distribution of take-home naloxone (THN) by emergency services may increase access to THN and reduce deaths and morbidity from opioid overdose. As part of a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of distribution of THN kits and education within ambulance services and Emergency Departments (EDs), we used qualitative methods to explore key stakeholders' perceptions of feasibility and acceptability of delivering the trial. METHODS: We undertook semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 26 people who use opioids and with 20 paramedics and ED staff from two intervention sites between 2019 and 2021. Interviews and focus groups were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: People using opioids reported high awareness of overdose management, including personal experience of THN use. Staff perceived emergency service provision of THN as a low-cost, low-risk intervention with potential to reduce mortality, morbidity and health service use. Staff understood the trial aims and considered it compatible with their work. All participants supported widening access to THN but reported limited trial recruitment opportunities partly due to difficulties in consenting patients during overdose. Procedural problems, restrictive recruitment protocols, limited staff buy-in and patients already owning THN limited trial recruitment. Determining trial effectiveness was challenging due to high levels of alternative community provision of THN. CONCLUSIONS: Distribution of THN in emergency settings was considered feasible and acceptable for stakeholders but an RCT to establish the effectiveness of THN delivery is unlikely to generate further useful evidence due to difficulties in recruiting patients and assessing benefits.

Implementation opportunities and challenges to piloting a community-based drug-checking intervention for sexual and gender minority men in Vancouver, Canada: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: In response to the overdose crisis, a collaborative group of two community-based organizations, a health authority and a research institute in Vancouver, Canada, implemented a pilot community-based drug checking (CBDC) intervention for sexual and gender minority (SGM) men. This study identified key factors that influenced the implementation of the CBDC intervention, including opportunities and challenges. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with seven pertinent parties involved in the CBDC, including policymakers, researchers and representatives from community-based organizations. These interviews were coded and analyzed using domains and constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: While drug-related stigma was identified as a challenge to deliver drug checking services, participants described the context of the overdose crisis as a key facilitator to engage collaboration between relevant organizations (e.g., health authorities, medical health officers, community organizations) to design, resource and implement the CBDC intervention. The implementation of the CBDC intervention was also influenced by SGM-specific needs and resources (e.g., lack of information about the drug supply). The high level of interest of SGM organizations in providing harm reduction services combined with the need to expand drug checking into community spaces represented two key opportunities for the CBDC intervention. Here, SGM organizations were recognized as valued partners that fostered a broader culture of harm reduction. Participants' emphasis that knowing the composition of one's drugs is a "right to know", particularly in the context of a highly contaminated illicit drug market, emerged as a key implementation factor. Lastly, participants emphasized the importance of involving SGM community groups at all stages of the implementation process to ensure that the CBDC intervention is appropriately tailored to SGM men. CONCLUSIONS: The context of the overdose crisis and the involvement of SGM organizations were key facilitators to the implementation of a drug checking intervention in SGM community spaces. This study offers contextualized understandings about how SGM knowledge and experiences can contribute to implement tailored drug checking interventions.

Substance use patterns, sociodemographics, and health profiles of harm reduction service recipients in Burlington, Vermont.

BACKGROUND: Understanding current substance use practices is critical to reduce and prevent overdose deaths among individuals at increased risk including persons who use and inject drugs. Because individuals participating in harm reduction and syringe service programs are actively using drugs and vary in treatment participation, information on their current drug use and preferred drugs provides a unique window into the drug use ecology of communities that can inform future intervention services and treatment provision. METHODS: Between March and June 2023, 150 participants in a harm reduction program in Burlington, Vermont completed a survey examining sociodemographics; treatment and medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) status; substance use; injection information; overdose information; and mental health, medical, and health information. Descriptive analyses assessed overall findings. Comparisons between primary drug subgroups (stimulants, opioids, stimulants-opioids) of past-three-month drug use and treatment participation were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Most participants reported being unhoused or unstable housing (80.7%) and unemployed (64.0%) or on disability (21.3%). The drug with the greatest proportion of participants reporting past three-month use was crack cocaine (83.3%). Fentanyl use was reported by 69.3% of participants and xylazine by 38.0% of participants. High rates of stimulant use were reported across all participants independent of whether stimulants were a participant's primary drug. Fentanyl, heroin, and xylazine use was less common in the stimulants subgroup compared to opioid-containing subgroups (p < .001). Current- and past-year MOUD treatment was reported by 58.0% and 77.3% of participants. Emergency rooms were the most common past-year medical treatment location (48.7%; M = 2.72 visits). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate high rates of polysubstance use and the underrecognized effects of stimulant use among people who use drugs-including its notable and increasing role in drug-overdose deaths. Crack cocaine was the most used stimulant, a geographical difference from much of the US where methamphetamine is most common. With the increasing prevalence of fentanyl-adulterated stimulants and differences in opioid use observed between subgroups, these findings highlight the importance and necessity of harm reduction interventions (e.g., drug checking services, fentanyl test strips) and effective treatment for individuals using stimulants alongside MOUD treatment.

Prescription Opioid Diversion Sources Among African Americans: Implications for Overdose Prevention.

Recent data show that African Americans (AAs) experienced a greater increase in overdose deaths involving prescription opioids relative to other racial/ethnic groups. One possible mechanism through which elevated risk for overdose is conferred to AAs could be due to greater exposure to contaminated counterfeit pills. Unfortunately, prescription opioid diversion is understudied among AAs and less is known regarding which sources AAs use to access pharmaceutical opioids. The objective of this study, therefore, was to identify and describe the most commonly used diversion sources for prescription opioids among AAs. Qualitative interview data are also presented to contextualize the most prevalent sources. This study used data from the Florida Minority Health Study, a mixed-methods project that included online surveys (n = 303) and qualitative in-depth interviews (n = 30) of AAs. Data collection was conducted from August 2021 to February 2022 throughout Southwest Florida. Analyses revealed that the most widely used sources for prescription opioids were dealers (33.0%) and friends/relatives (34.7%). Additionally, interview data indicated that dealers are the access point where larger volume acquisitions are made and high potency formulations are accessed. These findings suggest that AAs may utilize nonhealthcare related sources at higher rates than healthcare related sources to acquire prescription opioids. This is concerning because opioid pills acquired through nonhealthcare related sources are especially susceptible to fentanyl adulteration. These findings invite further study using nationally representative data to determine if AAs disproportionately use nonhealthcare related sources compared to persons from other racial/ethnic groups.

Older adult drug overdose: an application of latent class analysis to identify prevention opportunities.

BACKGROUND: Older adult overdose death rates have increased significantly in recent years. However, research for prevention of drug overdose death specific to older adults is limited. Our objective is to identify profiles based on missed intervention points (touchpoints) to inform prevention of future older adult unintentional overdose deaths. METHODS: We used latent class analysis methods to identify profiles of decedents aged 55 + years in the Illinois Statewide Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System. This system collects data on 92.6% of all unintentional overdose deaths in Illinois and includes data from death certificates, coroner/medical examiner, toxicology, and autopsy reports. Data include decedent demographics, circumstances leading up to and surrounding the fatal overdose and details regarding the overdose. Variables in the latent class analysis model included sex, race, alcohol test result, social isolation, recent emergency department (ED) visit, chronic pain, and pain treatment. RESULTS: We identified three distinct decent profiles. Class 1 (13% of decedents) included female decedents who were in pain treatment, had physical health problems, and had greater likelihood of a recent ED visit before their death. Class 2 (35% of decedents) decedents were most likely to be socially connected (live with others, employed, had social or family relationships) but less likely to have recent healthcare visits. Class 3 (52% of decedents) decedents had higher social isolation (lived alone, unemployed, unpartnered), were mostly male, had fewer known physical health conditions, and more alcohol positivity at time of death. White decedents are clustered in class 1 while Black decedents are predominant in classes 2 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: These profiles link to potential touchpoint opportunities for substance use disorder screening harm reduction and treatment. Class 1 members were most likely to be reachable in healthcare settings. However, most decedents were members of Classes 2 and 3 with less engagement in the healthcare system, suggesting a need for screening and intervention in different contexts. For Class 2, intervention touchpoints might include education and screening in work or social settings such as senior centers given the higher degree of social connectivity. For Class 3, the most isolated group, touchpoints may occur in the context of harm reduction outreach and social service delivery.

Co-located Heroin Assisted Treatment within primary care: A preliminary analysis of the implications for healthcare access, cost, and treatment delivery in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The UK is experiencing its highest rate of drug related deaths in 25 years. Poor and inconsistent access to healthcare negatively impacts health outcomes for people who use drugs. Innovation in models of care which promote access and availability of physical treatment is fundamental. Heroin Assisted Treatment (HAT) is a treatment modality targeted at the most marginalised people who use drugs, at high risk of mortality and morbidity. The first service-provider initiated HAT service in the UK ran between October 2019 and November 2022 in Middlesbrough, England. The service was co-located within a specialist primary care facility offering acute healthcare treatment alongside injectable diamorphine. METHODS: Analysis of anonymised health records for healthcare costs (not including drug treatment) took place using descriptive statistics prior and during engagement with HAT, at both three (n=15) and six (n=12) months. Primary outcome measures were incidents of wound care, skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs), overdose (OD) events, unplanned overnight stays in hospital, treatment engagement (general and within hospital care settings) and ambulance incidents. Secondary outcome measures were costs associated with these events. RESULTS: A shift in healthcare access for participants during HAT engagement was observed. HAT service attendance appeared to support health promoting preventative care, and reduce reactive reliance on emergency healthcare systems. At three and six months, engagement for preventative wound care and treatment for SSTIs increased at the practice. Unplanned emergency healthcare interactions for ODs, overnight hospital stays, serious SSTIs, and ambulance incidents reduced, and there was an increase in treatment engagement (i.e. a reduction in appointments which were not engaged with). There was a decrease in treatment engagement in hospital settings. Changes in healthcare utilisation during HAT translated to a reduction in healthcare costs of 58% within six months compared to the same timeframe from the period directly prior to commencing HAT. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study highlights the potential for innovative harm reduction interventions such as HAT, co-located with primary care services, to improve healthcare access and engagement for a high-risk population. Increased uptake of primary healthcare services translated to reductions in emergency healthcare use and associated costs. Although costs of HAT provision are substantial, the notable cost-savings in health care should be an important consideration in service implementation planning.

Radical hospitality: Innovative programming to build community and meet the needs of people who use drugs at a government-sanctioned overdose prevention site in San Francisco, California.

BACKGROUND: The Tenderloin Center (TLC), a multi-service center where people could receive or be connected to basic needs, behavioral health care, housing, and medical services, was open in San Francisco for 46 weeks in 2022. Within a week of operation, services expanded to include an overdose prevention site (OPS), also known as safe consumption site. OPSs have operated internationally for over three decades, but government-sanctioned OPSs have only recently been implemented in the United States. We used ethnographic methods to understand the ways in which a sanctioned OPS, situated in a multi-service center, impacts the lives of people who use drugs (PWUD). METHODS: We conducted participant observation and in-depth interviews June-December 2022. Extensive field notes and 39 in-depth interviews with 24 TLC guests and 15 TLC staff were analyzed using an inductive analysis approach. Interviewees were asked detailed questions about their experiences using and working at the TLC. RESULTS: TLC guests and staff described an atmosphere where radical hospitality-welcoming guests with extraordinary warmth, generosity, and unconditional acceptance-was central to the culture. We found that the co-location of an OPS within a multi-service agency (1) allowed for the culture of radical hospitality to flourish, (2) yielded a convenient one-stop shop model, (3) created a space for community building, and (4) offered safety and respite to guests. CONCLUSIONS: The co-location of an OPS within a multi-service drop-in center is an important example of how such an organization can build positive sociality among PWUD while protecting autonomy and reducing overdose mortality. Overdose response and reversal is an act of relational accountability in which friends, peers, and even strangers intervene to protect and revive one another. This powerful intervention was operationalized as an anti-oppressive, horizontal activity through radical hospitality with a built environment that allowed PWUD to be both social and safe.

Bridging the Gap in Harm Reduction Using Mobile Overdose Response Services (MORS) in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced additional health challenges for people who use substances (PWUS) amid the overdose crisis. Numerous harm reduction services, including supervised consumption sites (SCS) across Canada, faced shutdowns and reduced operating capacity in order to comply with public health measures. Mobile Overdose Response Services (MORS) are novel overdose prevention technologies that allow those who are unable to access alternative means of harm reduction to consume substances under the virtual supervision of a trained operator. Here, we examine the role of MORS in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 59 semi-structured interviews were conducted with the following key interest groups: PWUS, healthcare providers, harm reduction workers, MORS operators, and the general public. Inductive thematic analysis informed by grounded theory was used to identify major themes pertaining to the perception of MORS. As the pandemic shifted the public focus away from harm reduction, many participants viewed MORS as an acceptable strategy to reduce the harms associated with solitary substance and alleviate the sense of isolation driven by social distancing measures. While the pandemic may have increased the utility of MORS, concerns surrounding personal privacy and confidentiality remained. Overall, MORS were perceived as a useful adjunct service to address the unmet needs PWUS during the pandemic and beyond.

Kentucky Outreach Service Kiosk (KyOSK) Study protocol: a community-level, controlled quasi-experimental, type 1 hybrid effectiveness study to assess implementation, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a community-tailored harm reduction kiosk on HIV, HCV and overdose risk in rural Appalachia.

INTRODUCTION: Many rural communities bear a disproportionate share of drug-related harms. Innovative harm reduction service models, such as vending machines or kiosks, can expand access to services that reduce drug-related harms. However, few kiosks operate in the USA, and their implementation, impact and cost-effectiveness have not been adequately evaluated in rural settings. This paper describes the Kentucky Outreach Service Kiosk (KyOSK) Study protocol to test the effectiveness, implementation outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a community-tailored, harm reduction kiosk in reducing HIV, hepatitis C and overdose risk in rural Appalachia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: KyOSK is a community-level, controlled quasi-experimental, non-randomised trial. KyOSK involves two cohorts of people who use drugs, one in an intervention county (n=425) and one in a control county (n=325). People who are 18 years or older, are community-dwelling residents in the target counties and have used drugs to get high in the past 6 months are eligible. The trial compares the effectiveness of a fixed-site, staffed syringe service programme (standard of care) with the standard of care supplemented with a kiosk. The kiosk will contain various harm reduction supplies accessible to participants upon valid code entry, allowing dispensing data to be linked to participant survey data. The kiosk will include a call-back feature that allows participants to select needed services and receive linkage-to-care services from a peer recovery coach. The cohorts complete follow-up surveys every 6 months for 36 months (three preceding kiosk implementation and four post-implementation). The study will test the effectiveness of the kiosk on reducing risk behaviours associated with overdose, HIV and hepatitis C, as well as implementation outcomes and cost-effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Kentucky Institutional Review Board approved the protocol. Results will be disseminated in academic conferences and peer-reviewed journals, online and print media, and community meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05657106.

Drug Deactivation Pouches for Primary Prevention of Opioid Overdose: Perceptions and Attitudes of Community Members.

IMPORTANCE: A substantial number of opioid analgesics dispensed into communities will go unused and be susceptible to diversion for misuse. Convenient, efficient, and environmentally safe mechanisms for disposal are needed to prevent the diversion of unused opioid analgesics. OBJECTIVE: This initiative piloted the feasibility of distributing drug deactivation pouches in a community setting and examined community members' acceptance, intention to use drug deactivation pouches, and their current disposal practices of unused opioid analgesics. Although many studies have examined the benefits of deactivation pouches in preventing drug overdose, few have explored community members' perspectives, the feasibility, and the acceptability of these pouches in disposing of unused medications. METHODS: In the fall of 2017, we piloted the distribution of drug deactivation pouches to assess the overall interest in the pouches at a 3-day community event and continued the second wave of this pilot in the community from the summer of 2018 to the spring of 2019.Our main outcomes and measures included the acceptance of the drug deactivation pouches and the intention to use the pouches. "Acceptance" was defined as study participants physically taking the kit and "Intention" was how participants intended to use the pouch. RESULTS: A total of 170 community members were approached at a community event about the drug deactivation pouches and 116 accepted at least 1 pouch (68.2% acceptance rate). In the second wave, 124 community members were approached by Community Health Workers; 100% accepted the pouch. Overall, the acceptance rate was 81.6%. People mentioned significant interest in using the pouches. Furthermore, surveys that assessed community members' intention to use the deactivation pouches showed that 48% intended to use the pouch. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The distribution of drug deactivation pouches is feasible in a community setting and although community members expressed interest in using drug deactivation pouches to dispose of unused opioid analgesics and other drugs, the majority still disposed of their unused medications through other avenues. This, underscore the need to raise community members' awareness about the importance, benefits, and viability of these pouches as a tool for the primary prevention of opioid overdose because of their ease of use, safety, environmental considerations, and cost-effectiveness.