Increased risk of HIV and other drug-related harms associated with injecting in public places: national bio-behavioural survey of people who inject drugs

Background: Whilst injecting drugs in public places is considered a proxy for high risk behaviour among people who inject drugs (PWID), studies quantifying its relationship with multiple drug-related harms are lacking and none have examined this in the context of an ongoing HIV outbreak (located in Glasgow, Scotland). We aimed to: 1) estimate the prevalence of public injecting in Scotland and associated risk factors; and 2) estimate the association between public injecting and HIV, current HCV, overdose, and skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI). Methods: Cross-sectional, bio-behavioural survey (including dried blood spot testing to determine HIV and HCV infection) of 1469 current PWID (injected in last 6 months) recruited by independent interviewers from 139 harm reduction services across Scotland during 2017–18. Primary outcomes were: injecting in a public place (yes/no); HIV infection; current HCV infection; self-reported overdose in the last year (yes/no) and SSTI the last year (yes/no). Multi-variable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with public injecting and to estimate the association between public injecting and drug-related harms (HIV, current HCV, overdose and SSTI). Results: Prevalence of public injecting was 16% overall in Scotland and 47% in Glasgow city centre. Factors associated with increased odds of public injecting were: recruitment in Glasgow city centre (aOR=5.45, 95% CI 3.48–8.54, p<0.001), homelessness (aOR=3.68, 95% CI 2.61–5.19, p<0.001), high alcohol consumption (aOR=2.42, 95% CI 1.69–3.44, p<0.001), high injection frequency (≥4 per day) (aOR=3.16, 95% CI 1.93–5.18, p<0.001) and cocaine injecting (aOR=1.46, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.13, p = 0.046). Odds were lower for those receiving opiate substitution therapy (OST) (aOR=0.37, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.56, p<0.001) and older age (per year increase) (aOR=0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99, p = 0.013). Public injecting was associated with an increased risk of HIV infection (aOR=2.11, 95% CI 1.13–3.92, p = 0.019), current HCV infection (aOR=1.49, 95% CI 1.01–2.19, p = 0.043), overdose (aOR=1.59, 95% CI 1.27–2.01, p<0.001) and SSTI (aOR=1.42, 95% CI 1.17–1.73, p<0.001). Conclusions: These findings highlight the need to address the additional harms observed among people who inject in public places and provide evidence to inform proposals in the UK and elsewhere to introduce facilities that offer safer drug consumption environments

The United Kingdom’s first unsanctioned overdose prevention site; a proof-of-concept evaluation

Background: The United Kingdom (UK) is currently experiencing a public health crisis of drug-related deaths. The government has rejected recommendations to open overdose prevention services, under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. We report on the operation and use of an unsanctioned overdose prevention service which operated in Glasgow city centre from September 2020 to May 2021. Methods: Description of the service, with analysis of data collected on its use. Results: The service operated for nine months without permission or funding from official sources. We report on the 894 injections supervised and recorded, and nine successful interventions with overdose events (seven opioid/two cocaine). Powder cocaine injection predominated either alone (60.6%) or with heroin (22.1%). Injection was mostly in the groin (68.0%) or arm (16.8%). More injections were recorded by males (70.1%). Around two-thirds (65%) of injection events featured an individual who was also on a buprenorphine/methadone prescription. Conclusion: It is feasible for an overdose prevention service to operate successfully in the UK without being shut down by the police or with negative consequences for the community. Future sites in the UK must tailor to the regional trends in substances used by their potential clients and there is a notable difference to some international trends (e.g. no fentanyl use). There is an urgent need and demand for these services in the UK to reduce harm, prevent and intervene during overdose, and provide vital psychosocial support for health and wellbeing in a highly marginalised population

‘Why would we not want to keep everybody safe?’ The views of family members of people who use drugs on the implementation of drug consumption rooms in Scotland

BackgroundPeople who use drugs in Scotland are currently experiencing disproportionately high rates of drug-related deaths. Drug consumption rooms (DCRs) are harm reduction services that offer a safe, hygienic environment where pre-obtained drugs can be consumed under supervision. The aim of this research was to explore family member perspectives on DCR implementation in Scotland in order to inform national policy.MethodsScotland-based family members of people who were currently or formerly using drugs were invited to take part in semi-structured interviews to share views on DCRs. An inclusive approach to ‘family’ was taken, and family members were recruited via local and national networks. A convenience sample of 13 family members were recruited and interviews conducted, audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically using the Structured Framework Technique.ResultsFamily members demonstrated varying levels of understanding regarding the existence, role, and function of DCRs. While some expressed concern that DCRs would not prevent continued drug use, all participants were in favour of DCR implementation due to a belief that DCRs could reduce harm, including saving lives, and facilitate future recovery from drug use. Participants highlighted challenges faced by people who use drugs in accessing treatment/services that could meet their needs. They identified that accessible and welcoming DCRs led by trusting and non-judgemental staff could help to meet unmet needs, including signposting to other services. Family members viewed DCRs as safe environments and highlighted how the existence of DCRs could reduce the constant worry that they had of risk of harm to their loved ones. Finally, family members emphasised the challenge of stigma associated with drug use. They believed that introduction of DCRs would help to reduce stigma and provide a signal that people who use drugs deserve safety and care.ConclusionsReporting the experience and views of family members makes a novel and valuable contribution to ongoing public debates surrounding DCRs. Their views can be used to inform the implementation of DCRs in Scotland but also relate well to the development of wider responses to drug-related harm and reduction of stigma experienced by people who use drugs in Scotland and beyond

Drug Consumption Rooms and Public Health Policy: Perspectives of Scottish Strategic Decision-Makers

There is widespread support for the introduction of Drug Consumption Rooms (DCRs) in Scotland as part of a policy response to record levels of drug-related harm. However, existing legal barriers are made more complex by the division of relevant powers between the UK and Scottish Governments. This paper reports on a national, qualitative study of key decision-makers in both local and national roles across Scotland. It explores views on the political barriers and enablers to the adoption of Drug Consumption Rooms and the potential role of these facilities in the wider treatment system. It also considers approaches to evidence, especially the types of evidence that are considered valuable in supporting decision-making in this area. The study found that Scottish decision-makers are strongly supportive of DCR adoption; however, they remain unclear as to the legal and political mechanisms that would make this possible. They view DCRs as part of a complex treatment and support system rather than a uniquely transformative intervention. They see the case for introduction as sufficient, on the basis of need and available evidence, thus adopting a pragmatic and iterative approach to evidence, in contrast to an appeal to traditional evidence hierarchies more commonly adopted by the UK Government

A pragmatic harm reduction approach to manage a large outbreak of wound botulism in people who inject drugs, Scotland 2015

Abstract Background People who inject drugs (PWID) are at an increased risk of wound botulism, a potentially fatal acute paralytic illness. During the first 6 months of 2015, a large outbreak of wound botulism was confirmed among PWID in Scotland, which resulted in the largest outbreak in Europe to date. Methods A multidisciplinary Incident Management Team (IMT) was convened to conduct an outbreak investigation, which consisted of enhanced surveillance of cases in order to characterise risk factors and identify potential sources of infection. Results Between the 24th of December 2014 and the 30th of May 2015, a total of 40 cases were reported across six regions in Scotland. The majority of the cases were male, over 30 and residents in Glasgow. All epidemiological evidence suggested a contaminated batch of heroin or cutting agent as the source of the outbreak. There are significant challenges associated with managing an outbreak among PWID, given their vulnerability and complex addiction needs. Thus, a pragmatic harm reduction approach was adopted which focused on reducing the risk of infection for those who continued to inject and limited consequences for those who got infected. Conclusions The management of this outbreak highlighted the importance and need for pragmatic harm reduction interventions which support the addiction needs of PWID during an outbreak of spore-forming bacteria. Given the scale of this outbreak, the experimental learning gained during this and similar outbreaks involving spore-forming bacteria in the UK was collated into national guidance to improve the management and investigation of future outbreaks among PWID

A mixed-methods study to identify factors associated with MenACWY vaccine uptake, barriers and motivations towards vaccination among undergraduate students

Supplemental material, Appendix-final---0391_FINAL for A mixed-methods study to identify factors associated with MenACWY vaccine uptake, barriers and motivations towards vaccination among undergraduate students by Kirsten MA Trayner, Niall Anderson and J Claire Cameron in Health Education Journal</p

Effects of messaging on public support for drug consumption rooms in Scotland, UK

BACKGROUND There is evidence to suggest that medically supervised drug consumption rooms (DCRs) may form part of responses to reduce drug-related harm. Although DCRs have been established globally, they are perceived by some to be a controversial approach in the UK, and Government has repeatedly rejected proposals to establish one in Glasgow, Scotland. As public support is an important component of policy development and enactment, we sought to investigate the effects of different types of message framing on public support for DCR. METHODS We undertook a cross-sectional online study with a randomised design, conducted with a nationally representative sample. Participants were randomised to one of six message conditions comprising combinations of four components. All conditions included i) a basic description of a DCR, and conditions included combinations of ii) factual information; iii) pre-emptive refutation of common public concerns about DCR; and/or iv) a sympathetic narrative describing a mother whose son died from a heroin overdose. After reading each message, participants completed a bespoke measure assessing support for DCR. Data were analysed using ANCOVA. RESULTS Complete data were obtained from 1591 participants (50.3% Female; mean age 44.9 ± 16.1 years). Compared to reading a basic description of DCR alone, there was greater support for DCR in participants receiving the refutation (p < .001); sympathetic + factual (p < .05); and sympathetic + factual + refutation (p < .001) message conditions. Presenting factual or sympathetic messages alone were not associated with increased support. CONCLUSION Our findings suggest that public support for DCRs is not improved through communication of factual statements outlining potential benefits of the intervention alone. Advocates seeking to foster public support, and thus influence policy making, should also consider communication campaigns that address common concerns that the public might have about DCRs, and present the intervention in relation to potential benefits that they hold for people indirectly affected by drug-related harm