Feasibility and acceptability of a proposed pharmacy-based harm reduction intervention to reduce opioid overdose, HIV and hepatitis C

Meyerson, Beth E.; Agley, Jon; Jayawardene, Wasantha; Eldridge, Lori; Arora, Prachi; Smith, Carriann; Vadiei, Nina; Kennedy, Amy; Moehling, Taylor J.

doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2019.08.026

Cited by 27 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This method has been found to consistently produce response rates greater than 30% among Indiana pharmacists and advanced practice nurses. 28,35,36 There were 4 waves of recruitment: 3 mailed letters (including the initial invitation) and 1 telephone follow-up offering the choice for an invitation to be faxed or e-mailed or for the survey to be completed on the telephone. The latter step was conducted in early 2019 with all nonresponders but was terminated after several hundred calls because of pharmacist nonresponse.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploration of pharmacist comfort with harm reduction behaviors: Cross-sectional latent class analysis

Agley

Meyerson

Eldridge

et al. 2022

Journal of the American Pharmacists Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploration of pharmacist comfort with harm reduction behaviors: Cross-sectional latent class analysis

Agley

Meyerson

Eldridge

et al. 2022

Journal of the American Pharmacists Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Lack of knowledge about naloxone programs and discomfort in distributing naloxone kits were also seen from programs that were established in different jurisdictions [ 33 , 54 , 57 ]. A perceived lack of time for adequate client education and training was frequently mentioned as a barrier [ 23 - 24 , 30 , 41 - 42 , 51 , 56 , 58 , 60 , 64 , 68 ]; this could be addressed by the adoption of mitigating strategies. Such strategies include determining and maintaining a constant supply of naloxone, as well as ensuring that all healthcare disciplines responsible for distributing naloxone have a high degree of knowledge of and comfort with naloxone use, in order to better equip the healthcare workforce in addressing the opioid crisis [ 76 ].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspectives of Stakeholders of Equitable Access to Community Naloxone Programs: A Literature Review

Martignetti¹,

Sun²

2022

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this review is to examine the existing literature about facilitators and barriers influencing equitable access to naloxone programs by individuals who use opioids. A total of 49 published articles were examined, which generated four overarching themes:(1) Stigma as a barrier to access; (2) Lack of a wide range of stakeholder perspectives; (3) Need for a comprehensive understanding of factors affecting equitable access to naloxone programs; (4) Facilitators to increase the access of community naloxone programs. Our review highlighted the importance of advocacy in practice, education, administration, and policy to address the health inequities that exist in naloxone distribution programs. Advocacy activities involve the need for health care professionals to engage in social justice practice through evidence-based informed research about the facts of opioid use; challenging the stigma toward victim-blaming against naloxone users; as well as promoting program development and health policy to bring about equitable access to naloxone programs by marginalized and socially disadvantaged populations.

show abstract

“…Acceptability is defined as the attitudes about SIS and likely response to it by intended clients as well as those who might be Fig. 1 How quantitative survey results relate to the qualitative inquiry and findings potentially involved in implementing the program [87]. The survey, programmed using Qualtrics online software, included questions about socio-demographics, lifetime and current injection drug use and risk experiences, client's self-reported knowledge of, and attitudes towards, SIS, perceived demand for and utilization of SIS, and opinions about the acceptability of providing on-site SIS, both as part of the DHP and for inpatients.…”

Section: Participants and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility, acceptability, concerns, and challenges of implementing supervised injection services at a specialty HIV hospital in Toronto, Canada: perspectives of people living with HIV

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Substance use significantly impacts health and healthcare of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV), especially their ability to remain in hospital following admission. Supervised injection services (SIS) reduce overdoses and drug-related harms, but are not often provided within hospitals/outpatient programs. Leading us to question, what are PLHIV’s perceptions of hospital-based SIS? Methods This mixed-methods study explored feasibility and acceptability of implementing SIS at Casey House, a Toronto-based specialty HIV hospital, from the perspective of its in/outpatient clients. We conducted a survey, examining clients’ (n = 92) demand for, and acceptability of, hospital-based SIS. Following this, we hosted two focus groups (n = 14) and one-on-one interviews (n = 8) with clients which explored benefits/drawbacks of in-hospital SIS, wherein participants experienced guided tours of a demonstration SIS space and/or presentations of evidence about impacts of SIS. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Results Among survey participants, 76.1% (n = 70) identified as cis-male and over half (n = 49;54.4%) had been a hospital client for 2 years or less. Nearly half (48.8%) knew about clients injecting in/near Casey House, while 23.6% witnessed it. Survey participants were more supportive of SIS for inpatients (76.1%) than for outpatients (68.5%); most (74.7%) reported SIS implementation would not impact their level of service use at Casey House, while some predicted coming more often (16.1%) and others less often (9.2%). Most focus group/interview participants, believed SIS would enhance safety by reducing health harms (e.g. overdose), increasing transparency between clients and clinicians about substance use, and helping retain clients in care. Debate arose about who (e.g., in/outpatients vs. non-clients) should have access to hospital-based SIS and how implementation may shift organizational priorities/resources away from services not specific to drug use. Conclusions Our data showed widespread support of, and need for, hospital-based SIS among client stakeholders; however, attempts to reduce negative impacts on non-drug using clients need to be considered in the balance of implementation plans. Given the increased risks of morbidity and mortality for PLHIV who inject drugs as well as the problems in retaining them in care in a hospital setting, SIS is a key component of improving care for this marginalized group.

show abstract

Feasibility and acceptability of a proposed pharmacy-based harm reduction intervention to reduce opioid overdose, HIV and hepatitis C

Cited by 27 publications

References 40 publications

Exploration of pharmacist comfort with harm reduction behaviors: Cross-sectional latent class analysis

Exploration of pharmacist comfort with harm reduction behaviors: Cross-sectional latent class analysis

Perspectives of Stakeholders of Equitable Access to Community Naloxone Programs: A Literature Review

Feasibility, acceptability, concerns, and challenges of implementing supervised injection services at a specialty HIV hospital in Toronto, Canada: perspectives of people living with HIV

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About