An overview of take-home naloxone programs in Australia

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Take-home naloxone (THN) programs commenced in Australia in 2012 in the Australian Capital Territory and programs now operate in five Australian jurisdictions. The purpose of this paper is to record the progress of THN programs in Australia, to provide a resource for others wanting to start THN projects, and provide a tool for policy makers and others considering expansion of THN programs in this country and elsewhere. DESIGN AND METHODS: Key stakeholders with principal responsibility for identified THN programs operating in Australia provided descriptions of program development, implementation and characteristics. Short summaries of known THN programs from each jurisdiction are provided along with a table detailing program characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: Data collected across current Australian THN programs suggest that to date over 2500 Australians at risk of overdose have been trained and provided naloxone. Evaluation data from four programs recorded 146 overdose reversals involving naloxone that was given by THN participants. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Peer drug user groups currently play a central role in the development, delivery and scale-up of THN in Australia. Health professionals who work with people who use illicit opioids are increasingly taking part as alcohol and other drug-related health agencies have recognised the opportunity for THN provision through interactions with their clients. Australia has made rapid progress in removing regulatory barriers to naloxone since the initiation of the first THN program in 2012. However, logistical and economic barriers remain and further work is needed to expand access to this life-saving medication.The Canberra THN evaluation was supported by funding from ACT Health. The Perth evaluation was funded by Mental Health Commission of WA (formerly the Drug and Alcohol Office of WA). The Melbourne THN evaluation was funded through the Centre for Research Excellence in Injecting Drug Use [NHMRC ID: GNT1001144] and the Victoria University Out-of-Cycle Collaborative Grants Scheme. Simon Lenton is supported by funding from the Australian Government under the Substance Misuse Prevention and Service Improvement Grants Fund through its core funding of the National Drug Research Institute

An organisational change intervention for increasing the delivery of smoking cessation support in addiction treatment centres: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: The provision of smoking cessation support in Australian drug and alcohol treatment services is sub-optimal. This study examines the cost-effectiveness of an organisational change intervention to reduce smoking amongst clients attending drug and alcohol treatment services. Methods/design: A cluster-randomised controlled trial will be conducted with drug and alcohol treatment centres as the unit of randomisation. Biochemically verified (carbon monoxide by breath analysis) client 7-day-point prevalence of smoking cessation at 6 weeks will be the primary outcome measure. The study will be conducted in 33 drug and alcohol treatment services in four mainland states and territories of Australia: New South Wales, Australian Capital Territory, Queensland, and South Australia. Eligible services are those with ongoing client contact and that include pharmacotherapy services, withdrawal management services, residential rehabilitation, counselling services, and case management services. Eligible clients are those aged over 16 years who are attending their first of a number of expected visits, are self-reported current smokers, proficient in the English language, and do not have severe untreated mental illness as identified by the service staff. Control services will continue to provide usual care to the clients. Intervention group services will receive an organisational change intervention, including assistance in developing smoke-free policies, nomination of champions, staff training and educational client and service resources, and free nicotine replacement therapy in order to integrate smoking cessation support as part of usual client care. Discussion: If effective, the organisational change intervention has clear potential for implementation as part of the standard care in drug and alcohol treatment centres

Effect of increasing the delivery of smoking cessation care in alcohol and other drug treatment centres: a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Aims were to test the effectiveness of an organizational change intervention integrating smoking cessation treatment into usual alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment, compared with usual care, on (1) 7-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) at 8 weeks follow-up; (2) prolonged abstinence; (3) cigarettes smoked per day; (4) number of quit attempts; and (5) offer and use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). All outcomes were assessed at 8 weeks and 6.5 months follow-up. Design Cluster-randomized controlled trial, with AOD service as unit of randomization, conducted January 2015–March 2016. Setting Thirty-two eligible services (provided face-to-face client sessions to ≥ 50 clients/year) in Australia were randomized to control (usual care; n = 15) or intervention (n = 17) groups by an independent blinded biostatistician. Participants Eligible participants (≥ 16 years, current smoker) completed surveys at the service at baseline (n = 896) and telephone follow-up surveys (conducted by blinded assessors) at 8 weeks (n = 471; 53%) and 6.5 months (n = 427; 48%). Intervention Intervention services received an intervention to establish routine screening, assessment and delivery of smoking cessation care. Measurements Primary outcome was biochemically verified 7-day PPA at 8- week follow-up. Secondary outcomes included verified and self-reported prolonged abstinence, self-reported 7-day PPA, cigarettes/day, quit attempts and offer and use of NRT. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed, assuming missing participants were not abstinent. Findings At 8 weeks, the findings in verified 7-day PPA between groups [2.6 versus 1.8%, odds ratio (OR) = 1.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.5–5.7, P = 0.373] were inconclusive as to whether a difference was present. Significantly lower mean cigarettes/day were reported in the intervention group compared to the usual care group at 8 weeks [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.8–0.95, P = 0.001] but were similar at 6.5 months (IRR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.9–1.02, P = 0.240) follow-up. At both follow-ups the intervention group reported higher rates of NRT use. Conclusions Integrating smoking cessation treatment into addiction services did not significantly improve short-term abstinence from smoking.Funding was received from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC 1045840) and the Cancer Council New South Wales (CCNSW)

Effect of increasing the delivery of smoking cessation care in alcohol and other drug treatment centres: a cluster-randomized controlled trial

2019 Society for the Study of Addiction Aim: Aims were to test the effectiveness of an organizational change intervention integrating smoking cessation treatment into usual alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment, compared with usual care, on (1) 7-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) at 8 weeks follow-up; (2) prolonged abstinence; (3) cigarettes smoked per day; (4) number of quit attempts; and (5) offer and use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). All outcomes were assessed at 8 weeks and 6.5 months follow-up. Design: Cluster-randomized controlled trial, with AOD service as unit of randomization, conducted January 2015-March 2016. Setting: Thirty-two eligible services (provided face-to-face client sessions to ≥ 50 clients/year) in Australia were randomized to control (usual care; n = 15) or intervention (n = 17) groups by an independent blinded biostatistician. Participants: Eligible participants (≥ 16 years, current smoker) completed surveys at the service at baseline (n = 896) and telephone follow-up surveys (conducted by blinded assessors) at 8 weeks (n = 471; 53%) and 6.5 months (n = 427; 48%). Intervention: Intervention services received an intervention to establish routine screening, assessment and delivery of smoking cessation care. Measurements: Primary outcome was biochemically verified 7-day PPA at 8-week follow-up. Secondary outcomes included verified and self-reported prolonged abstinence, self-reported 7-day PPA, cigarettes/day, quit attempts and offer and use of NRT. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed, assuming missing participants were not abstinent. Findings: At 8 weeks, the findings in verified 7-day PPA between groups [2.6 versus 1.8%, odds ratio (OR) = 1.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.5-5.7, P = 0.373] were inconclusive as to whether a difference was present. Significantly lower mean cigarettes/day were reported in the intervention group compared to the usual care group at 8 weeks [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.8-0.95, P = 0.001] but were similar at 6.5 months (IRR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.9-1.02, P = 0.240) follow-up. At both follow-ups the intervention group reported higher rates of NRT use. Conclusions: Integrating smoking cessation treatment into addiction services did not significantly improve short-term abstinence from smoking

Additional file 2: of An organisational change intervention for increasing the delivery of smoking cessation support in addiction treatment centres: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

TNT Intervention Manual - FULL. An organisational change intervention manual for smoking cessation in drug and alcohol treatment centres. A comprehensive manual detailing the TNT intervention strategies with reference to the background literature supporting each of the intervention components and guiding theoretical frameworks. (PDF 3047 kb

Evaluation of a person-centred, nurse-led model of care delivering hepatitis C testing and treatment in priority settings: a mixed-methods evaluation of the Tasmanian Eliminate Hepatitis C Australia Outreach Project, 2020–2022

Introduction: Australia has experienced sustained reductions in hepatitis C testing and treatment and may miss its 2030 elimination targets. Addressing gaps in community-based hepatitis C prescribing in priority settings that did not have, or did not prioritise, hepatitis C testing and treatment care pathways is critical. Methods: The Tasmanian Eliminate Hepatitis C Australia Outreach Project delivered a nurse-led outreach model of care servicing hepatitis C priority populations in the community through the Tasmanian Statewide Sexual Health Service, supported by the Eliminating Hepatitis C Australia partnership. Settings included alcohol and other drug services, needle and syringe programs and mental health services. The project provided clients with clinical care across the hepatitis C cascade of care, including testing, treatment, and post-treatment support and hepatitis C education for staff. Results: Between July 2020 and July 2022, a total of 43 sites were visited by one Clinical Nurse Consultant. There was a total of 695 interactions with clients across 219 days of service delivery by the Clinical Nurse Consultant. A total of 383 clients were tested for hepatitis C (antibody, RNA, or both). A total of 75 clients were diagnosed with hepatitis C RNA, of which 95% (71/75) commenced treatment, 83% (62/75) completed treatment and 52% (39/75) received a negative hepatitis C RNA test at least 12 weeks after treatment completion. Conclusions: Providing outreach hepatitis C services in community-based services was effective in engaging people living with and at-risk of hepatitis C, in education, testing, and care. Nurse-led, person-centred care was critical to the success of the project. Our evaluation underscores the importance of employing a partnership approach when delivering hepatitis C models of care in community settings, and incorporating workforce education and capacity-building activities when working with non-specialist healthcare professionals