'We are always in some form of contact':Friendships among homeless drug and alcohol users living in hostels

Homeless drug and alcohol users are one of the most marginalised groups in society. They frequently have complex needs and limited social support. In this paper, we explore the role of friendship in the lives of homeless drug and alcohol users living in hostels, using the concepts of ‘social capital’ and ‘recovery capital’ to frame the analyses. The study was undertaken in three hostels, each in a different English city, during 2013–2014. Audio recorded semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 30 residents (9 females; 21 males) who self‐reported drink and/or drug problems; follow‐up interviews were completed 4–6 weeks later with 22 participants (6 females; 16 males). Data were transcribed verbatim, coded using the software package MAXQDA, and analysed using Framework. Only 21 participants reported current friends at interview 1, and friendship networks were small and changeable. Despite this, participants desired friendships that were culturally normative. Eight categories of friend emerged from the data: family‐like friends; using friends; homeless friends; childhood friends; online‐only friends; drug treatment friends; work friends; and mutual interest friends. Routine and regular contact was highly valued, with family‐like friends appearing to offer the most constant practical and emotional support. The use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) was central to many participants' friendships, keeping them connected to social support and recovery capital outside homelessness and substance‐using worlds. We conclude that those working with homeless drug and alcohol users – and potentially other marginalised populations – could beneficially encourage their clients to identify and build upon their most positive and reliable relationships. Additionally, they might explore ways of promoting the use of ICTs to combat loneliness and isolation. Texting, emailing, online mutual aid meetings, chatrooms, Internet penpals, skyping and other social media all offer potentially valuable opportunities for building friendships that can bolster otherwise limited social and recovery capital

Opioid overdose reversals using naloxone in New York City by people who use opioids:Implications for public health and overdose harm reduction approaches from a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Adverse reactions to naloxone, such as withdrawal symptoms and aggression, are widely recognised in the literature by pharmaceutical manufacturers and clinical practitioners as standard reactions of individuals who are physically dependent upon opioid drugs following the reversal of potentially fatal opioid overdose. This paper seeks to provide a differentiated view on reactions to naloxone that may have important implications for public health and harm reduction approaches. METHODS: Analyses from a qualitative investigation embedded within a 5-year Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) examined the risks and benefits of Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) training models (brief or extended training) in various populations of people who use opioids in New York City. The qualitative experiences (obtained through semi-structured interviews) of 46 people who use opioids and who were each involved in the delivery of naloxone, during 56 separate overdose events that occurred throughout 2016–2018, were studied. Situational analysis and inductive content analysis of interview data focused upon overdose reversals in an attempt to provide understandings of the various adverse effects associated with naloxone from their perspective. These analyses were supplemented by data sessions within the research team during which the findings obtained from situational analysis and inductive content analysis were reviewed and complemented by deductive (clinical) appraisals of the various physical and psychological effects associated with the overdose reversals. RESULTS: People who use opioids recognise three distinct and interconnected outcomes that may follow a successful opioid overdose reversal after intramuscular or intranasal administration of naloxone. These outcomes are here termed, i) ‘rage’ (describing a wide range of angry, hostile and/or aggressive outbursts), ii) ‘withdrawal symptoms,’ and iii) ‘not rage, not withdrawal’ (i.e., a wide range of short-lived, ‘harmless’ conditions (such as temporary amnesia, mild emotional outbursts, or physical discomfort) that do not include rage or withdrawal symptoms). CONCLUSION: Physical and psychological reactions to naloxone should not be understood exclusively as a consequence of acute, opioid-related, withdrawal symptoms. The three distinct and interconnected reversal outcomes identified in this study are considered from a harm reduction policy perspective and are further framed by concepts associated with ‘mediated toxicity’ (i.e. harm triggered by medicine). The overall conclusion is that harm reduction training programmes that are aligned to the policy and practice of take home naloxone may be strengthened by including awareness and training in how to best respond to ‘rage’ associated with overdose reversal following naloxone administration by people who use opioids and other laypersons

A qualitative study of repeat naloxone administrations during opioid overdose intervention by people who use opioids in New York City.

BACKGROUND: Take-home naloxone (THN) kits have been designed to provide community members (including people who use drugs, their families and/or significant others) with the necessary resources to address out-of-hospital opioid overdose events. Kits typically include two doses of naloxone. This 'twin-pack' format means that lay responders need information on how to use each dose. Advice given tends to be based on dosage algorithms used by medical personnel. However, little is currently known about how and why people who use drugs, acting as lay responders, decide to administer the second dose contained within single THN kits. The aim of this article is to explore this issue. METHODS: Data were generated from a qualitative semi-structured interview study that was embedded within a randomised controlled trial examining the risks and benefits of Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) training in New York City (NYC). Analysis for this article focuses upon the experiences of 22 people who use(d) opioids and who provided repeat naloxone administrations (RNA) during 24 separate overdose events. The framework method of analysis was used to compare the time participants believed had passed between each naloxone dose administered (‘subjective response interval’) with the ‘recommended response interval’ (2-4 minutes) given during OEND training. Framework analysis also charted the various reasons and rationale for providing RNA during overdose interventions. RESULTS: When participants’ subjective response intervals were compared with the recommended response interval for naloxone dosing, three different time periods were reported for the 24 overdose events: i. ‘two doses administered in under 2 minutes’ (n=10); ii. ‘two doses administered within 2-4 minutes’ (n=7), and iii. ‘two doses administered more than 4 minutes apart’ (n=7). A variety of reasons were identified for providing RNA within each of the three categories of response interval. Collectively, reasons for RNA included panic, recognition of urgency, delays in retrieving naloxone kit, perceptions of recipients’ responsiveness/non-responsiveness to naloxone, and avoidance of Emergency Response Teams (ERT). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that decision-making processes by people who use opioids regarding how and when to provide RNA are influenced by factors that relate to the emergency event. In addition, the majority of RNA (17/24) occurred outside of the recommended response interval taught during OEND training. These findings are discussed in terms of evidence-based intervention and ‘evidence-making intervention’ with suggestions for how RNA guidance may be developed and included within future/existing models of OEND training