Implementation of buprenorphine services in NYC syringe services programs: a qualitative process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Syringe services programs (SSPs) hold promise for providing buprenorphine treatment access to people with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are reluctant to seek care elsewhere. In 2017, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) provided funding and technical assistance to nine SSPs to develop "low-threshold" buprenorphine services as part of a multipronged initiative to lower opioid-related overdose rates. The aim of this study was to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementing SSP-based buprenorphine services. METHODS: We conducted 26 semi-structured qualitative interviews from April 2019 to November 2019 at eight SSPs in NYC that received funding and technical assistance from DOHMH. Interviews were conducted with three categories of staff: leadership (i.e., buprenorphine program management or leadership, eight interviews), staff (i.e., buprenorphine coordinators or other staff, eleven interviews), and buprenorphine providers (six interviews). We identified themes related to barriers and facilitators to program implementation using thematic analysis. We make recommendations for implementation based on our findings. RESULTS: Programs differed in their stage of development, location of services provided, and provider type, availability, and practices. Barriers to providing buprenorphine services at SSPs included gaps in staff knowledge and comfort communicating with participants about buprenorphine, difficulty hiring buprenorphine providers, managing tension between harm reduction and traditional OUD treatment philosophies, and financial constraints. Challenges also arose from serving a population with unmet psychosocial needs. Implementation facilitators included technical assistance from DOHMH, designated buprenorphine coordinators, offering other supportive services to participants, and telehealth to bridge gaps in provider availability. Key recommendations include: (1) health departments should provide support for SSPs in training staff, building health service infrastructure and developing policies and procedures, (2) SSPs should designate a buprenorphine coordinator and ensure regular training on buprenorphine for frontline staff, and (3) buprenorphine providers should be selected or supported to use a harm reduction approach to buprenorphine treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite encountering challenges, SSPs implemented buprenorphine services outside of conventional OUD treatment settings. Our findings have implications for health departments, SSPs, and other community organizations implementing buprenorphine services. Expansion of low-threshold buprenorphine services is a promising strategy to address the opioid overdose epidemic.

Costs of opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution in New York City.

Background: Naloxone is an opioid antagonist medication that can be administered by lay people or medical professionals to reverse opioid overdoses and reduce overdose mortality. Cost was identified as a potential barrier to providing expanded overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) in New York City (NYC) in 2017. We estimated the cost of delivering OEND for different types of opioid overdose prevention programs (OOPPs) in NYC. Methods: We interviewed naloxone coordinators at 11 syringe service programs (SSPs) and 10 purposively sampled non-SSPs in NYC from December 2017 to September 2019. The samples included diverse non-SSP program types, program sizes, and OEND funding sources. We calculated one-time start up costs and ongoing operating costs using micro-costing methods to estimate the cost of personnel time and materials for OEND activities from the program perspective, but excluding naloxone kit costs. Results: Implementing an OEND program required a one-time median startup cost of $874 for SSPs and $2,548 for other programs excluding overhead, with 80% of those costs attributed to time and travel for training staff. SSPs spent a median of $90 per staff member trained and non-SSPs spent $150 per staff member. The median monthly cost of OEND program activities excluding overhead was $1,579 for SSPs and $2,529 for non-SSPs. The costs for non-SSPs varied by size, with larger, multi-site programs having higher median costs compared to single-site programs. The estimated median cost per kit dispensed excluding and including overhead was $19 versus $25 per kit for SSPs, and $36 versus $43 per kit for non-SSPs, respectively. Conclusions: OEND operating costs vary by program type and number of sites. Funders should consider that providing free naloxone to OEND programs does not cover full operating costs. Further exploration of cost-effectiveness and program efficiency should be considered across different types of OEND settings.

Functional and environmental determinants of bark thickness in fire-free temperate rain forest communities.

PREMISE OF THE STUDY: In fire-prone ecosystems, variation in bark thickness among species and communities has been explained by fire frequency; thick bark is necessary to protect cambium from lethal temperatures. Elsewhere this investment is deemed unnecessary, and thin bark is thought to prevail. However, in rain forest ecosystems where fire is rare, bark thickness varies widely among species and communities, and the causes of this variation remain enigmatic. We tested for functional explanations of bark thickness variation in temperate rain forest species and communities. METHODS: We measured bark thickness in 82 tree species throughout New Zealand temperate rain forests that historically have experienced little fire and applied two complementary analyses. First, we examined correlations between bark traits and leaf habit, and leaf and stem traits. Second, we calculated community-weighted mean (CWM) bark thickness for 272 plots distributed throughout New Zealand to identify the environments in which thicker-barked communities occur. KEY RESULTS: Conifers had higher size-independent bark thickness than evergreen angiosperms. Species with thicker bark or higher bark allocation coefficients were not associated with "slow economic" plant traits. Across 272 forest plots, communities with thicker bark occurred on infertile soils, and communities with thicker bark and higher bark allocation coefficients occurred in cooler, drier climates. CONCLUSIONS: In non-fire-prone temperate rain forest ecosystems, investment in bark is driven by soil resources, cool minimum temperatures, and seasonal moisture stress. The role of these factors in fire-prone ecosystems warrants testing.