People who inject drugs (PWID) are the group most affected by HCV; however, treatment uptake has been low. Engagement between PWID and healthcare workers has been characterized by mistrust and discrimination. Peer support for HCV is one way to overcome these barriers. Peer support models for chronic disease management have been successfully applied for other diseases. HCV peer support models have been implemented in various settings, but those that include opioid substitution treatment have been more common. Most models have been either service generated (provider led) or community controlled (peer led). Peer support models have been implemented successfully, with a range of outcomes including increased treatment knowledge and uptake and improved service provision. Genuine partnerships between peers and services were common across models and led to positive transformations for both clients and services. Further investigation of peer support for HCV treatment and its impact on both individuals and services is recommended.

Background Peer-led programs with people who use drugs (PWUD) have been a key characteristic of the harm reduction in many countries, including their involvement in research. However, peer involvement in research is often limited to recruitment, consultation, and reporting back, rather than a genuine collaboration in the priority setting, design, and conduct of research. PWUD peer organizations face ongoing challenges to demonstrate the depth of their knowledge of current and emerging issues within drug-using networks and the value of their peer insights for effective research and policy. The identification of benefits, barriers, and enablers for meaningful participation of PWUD in research has often been limited to methodological rather than system level factors. Methods This paper draws on the experiences and findings of the What Works and Why (W3) Project, a 5-year collaborative study with peer organizations. The study drew on systems thinking methods to develop a framework to demonstrate the role of peer organizations within their community and policy systems. The study required peer staff and researchers to undertake the simultaneous role of drivers, participants, and analysts in the research. To identify the learnings in relation to meaningful participation of PWUD peer organizations in research, we drew together the insights and experiences of peer staff and researchers across the 5 years of the study Results The W3 Project provided insights into the nuances of community-engaged research practice and the ongoing benefits, barriers, and enablers to the meaningful participation of PWUD and their peer organizations. These included system-level barriers and enablers beyond individual research projects or methodology. The capacity of research and peer organizations to maintain meaningful peer participation in research can be restricted or enhanced by the systems in which they are embedded. Conclusions Recognizing peer organizations as active participants and drivers within community and policy systems can help clarify their unique and critical role in research. Achieving meaningful collaboration with PWUD peer organizations requires looking beyond good practice methods to the system-level factors with attention to the system-level benefits, barriers, and enablers.

No abstract

Introduction Vaccine acceptability is a key determinant of vaccination uptake. Despite being at risk of adverse outcomes from coronavirus‐19 disease (COVID‐19), COVID‐19 vaccine acceptability among people who inject drugs is unknown. We surveyed people who inject drugs in Melbourne, Australia to assess potential uptake of COVID‐19 vaccines prior to distribution. Methods Cross‐sectional study, comprising interviewer‐administered structured telephone interviews completed from 30 November to 22 December 2020 in Melbourne, Australia. Participants were people aged 18 years or older who injected drugs at least monthly in the past 6 months and had resided in Melbourne in the past 12 months recruited via needle‐syringe programs and word‐of‐mouth. Measurements COVID‐19 hypothetical vaccine acceptability, participants' demographic, drug use and drug treatment characteristics. Results Fifty‐eight percent (57/99) of the sample reported that they would definitely or probably be vaccinated for COVID‐19, with the remainder indicating that they would not (22%) or were undecided (20%). Among those who indicated that they would definitely or probably not be vaccinated or were undecided ( n = 42), safety concerns were most often cited as a reason for not wanting to be vaccinated. Discussion and Conclusions Although a majority of sampled people who inject drugs indicated that they would definitely or probably be vaccinated, efforts to reduce hesitancy and allay COVID‐19 vaccine safety concerns will be necessary to optimise vaccine uptake among this population.

Despite advances in understanding the structural contexts in which drug use occurs and shifts beyond the individual-level focus of adult education theory, peer education models remain wedded to questions of individual behaviour. Our analysis examines the structural context of peer education and its implications for peer training. People who inject drugs (PWID) were invited to participate in a series of three focus group discussions in order to develop peer education messages and strategies. These were then trialled by participants within their networks and their experiences discussed in subsequent focus groups. The influence of structural factors (such as the policing of public space) on participants' peer education attempts were identified and discussed. We propose that despite the damaging impact of structural factors on the lives of PWID, they can in turn be used by peer educators to develop innovative interventions designed to increase resilience and reduce internalized stigma. Peer education programmes need sufficient flexibility and resources to allow for the negotiation of participants' immediate needs and for collaborative learning between PWID and peer educators. This would require an informed and responsive funder-a challenge to the current orthodoxy wherein peer education is increasingly delivered in formats predetermined by the funder.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract