'It's not going to be a one size fits all': a qualitative exploration of the potential utility of three drug checking service models in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Scotland currently has the highest rates of drug-related deaths in Europe, so drug checking services are being explored due to their potential role in reducing these deaths and related harms. Drug checking services allow individuals to submit presumed psychoactive drug samples for analysis, and then receive individualised feedback and counselling. This paper explores participants' views on the advantages and challenges of three hypothetical service models, to inform future service delivery in Scotland. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 43 people: 27 professional stakeholders, 11 people with experience of drug use, and five family members across three cities. Vignettes were used to provide short descriptions of three hypothetical service models during the interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants identified advantages and challenges for each of the three potential service models. The third sector (not-for-profit) model was favoured overall by participants, and the NHS substance use treatment service was the least popular. Participants also noted that multiple drug checking sites within one city, along with outreach models would be advantageous, to meet the diverse needs of different groups of people who use drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Drug checking services need to be tailored to local context and needs, with a range of service models being possible, in order to meet the needs of a heterogeneous group of people who use drugs. Addressing issues around stigma, accessibility, and concerns about the potential impact of accessing drug checking on access to and outcomes of drug treatment, are essential for successful service delivery.

Feasibility and Acceptability of an Overdose Prevention Intervention Delivered by Community Pharmacists for Patients Prescribed Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain.

There have been increases in prescriptions of high strength opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP), but CNCP patients perceive themselves as being at low risk of opioid overdose and generally have limited overdose awareness. This study examined how an overdose prevention intervention (opioid safety education, naloxone training, and take-home naloxone (THN)) delivered by community pharmacists for patients prescribed high-strength opioids for CNCP would work in practice in Scotland. Twelve patients received the intervention. CNCP patients and Community Pharmacists were interviewed about their experiences of the intervention and perceptions of its acceptability and feasibility. CNCP patients did not initially perceive themselves as being at risk of overdose but, through the intervention, developed insight into opioid-related risk and the value of naloxone. Pharmacists also identified patients' low risk perceptions and low overdose awareness. While pharmacists had positive attitudes towards the intervention, they outlined challenges in delivering it under time and resource pressures and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overdose prevention interventions are required in the CNCP population as this group has elevated risk factors for overdose but are commonly overlooked. Customised overdose prevention interventions for CNCP patients attend to gaps in overdose awareness and risk perceptions in this population.

Examining the impact of the first wave of COVID-19 and associated control measures on interventions to prevent blood-borne viruses among people who inject drugs in Scotland: an interrupted time series study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has likely affected the delivery of interventions to prevent blood-borne viruses (BBVs) among people who inject drugs (PWID). We examined the impact of the first wave of COVID-19 in Scotland on: 1) needle and syringe provision (NSP), 2) opioid agonist therapy (OAT) and 3) BBV testing. METHODS: An interrupted time series study design; 23rd March 2020 (date of the first 'lockdown') was chosen as the key date. RESULTS: The number of HIV tests and HCV tests in drug services/prisons, and the number of needles/syringes (N/S) distributed decreased by 94% (RR=0.062, 95% CI 0.041-0.094, p < 0.001), 95% (RR=0.049, 95% CI 0.034-0.069, p < 0.001) and 18% (RR = 0.816, 95% CI 0.750-0.887, p < 0.001), respectively, immediately after lockdown. Post-lockdown, an increasing trend was observed relating to the number of N/S distributed (0.6%; RR = 1.006, 95% CI 1.001-1.012, p = 0.015), HIV tests (12.1%; RR = 1.121, 95% CI 1.092-1.152, p < 0.001) and HCV tests (13.2%; RR = 1.132, 95 CI 1.106-1.158, p < 0.001). Trends relating to the total amount of methadone prescribed remained stable, but a decreasing trend in the number of prescriptions (2.4%; RR = 0.976, 95% CI 0.959-0.993, p = 0.006) and an increasing trend in the quantity prescribed per prescription (2.8%; RR = 1.028, 95% CI 1.013-1.042, p < 0.001) was observed post-lockdown. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 impacted the delivery of BBV prevention services for PWID in Scotland. While there is evidence of service recovery; further effort is likely required to return some intervention coverage to pre-pandemic levels in the context of subsequent waves of COVID-19.