Search

Background: Fentanyl test strips (FTS) are lateral flow immunoassay strips designed for detection of ng/mL levels of fentanyl in urine. In 2021, the US Centers for Disease Control and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration stated that federal funds could be used for procurement of FTS for harm reduction strategies approved by the government such as drug checking. The market for FTS has expanded rapidly in the US and Canada. However, there is no regulatory oversight by either government to ensure proper function of FTS that are being marketed for drug checking. Main body: Many brands of FTS have rapidly entered the harm reduction market, creating concerns about the reproducibility and accuracy of their performance from brand to brand and lot to lot. Some examples are provided in this Comment. Similar problems with product quality were observed in the mid 2000's when lateral flow immunoassays for malaria were funded in many countries and again in 2020, when COVID-19 tests were in huge demand. The combination of high demand and low levels of regulation and enforcement led some manufacturers to join the goldrush without adequate field testing or quality assurance. We argue that the harm reduction community urgently needs to set a lot checking program in place. A set of simple protocols for conducting the tests and communicating the results have been developed, and are described in the following Perspectives paper in this issue. Conclusion: In the absence of governmental regulation and enforcement, the harm reduction community should implement a FTS lot checking program. Based on previous experience with the malaria diagnostic lot checking program, this inexpensive effort could identify products that are not suitable for harm reduction applications and provide valuable feedback to manufacturers. Dissemination of the results will help harm reduction organizations to ensure that FTS they use for drug checking are fit for the purpose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Graphic Health Warnings (GHWs) on cigarette packages were first introduced in Canada in 2001 and will become mandatory in the US as of January 2022. While previous studies have evaluated the impacts of GHWs, the data used in these studies have several shortcomings. The objective of this paper was to investigate the likely impact of such warnings in the US based upon the experience of Canada using hitherto unexplored monthly cigarette sales data, and to explore if alternative approaches involving risk-reduced products might be more successful in reducing smoking. Methods: We used quasi-experimental segmented regression and difference-in-differences analyses. Data on monthly sales (i.e., shipments) of cigarettes from Canadian manufacturers to Canadian retailers during 1995–2005 were obtained from Statistics Canada. Results: We found that GHWs did not have a significant impact on the sales of cigarettes in Canada. We propose an alternative type of graphical health messaging that actively combines information on how to quit with the legally required messaging. The novelty of the proposal is that it is incentive compatible for the supply side of the market and if adopted in several states, the measure could be tested by using a suitable treatment–control design. Conclusions: Our findings imply that we should not expect any notable decline in sales or consumption as a result of implementation of GHWs in the US. The main impact of GHWs will be to add to the anti-smoking culture that has grown steadily over several decades, and this may impact smoking in the longer term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Indigenous communities in Canada face significant challenges with intergenerational trauma, which manifests in substance use disorders. There is consensus that connecting treatment approaches to culture, land, community, and spiritual practices is a pathway to healing trauma and substance use disorders for Indigenous peoples. Indigenous residential addiction treatment programs have been established as the primary intervention to provide healing for Indigenous peoples with substance use disorders and intergenerational trauma. However, there is limited evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of these programs. In collaboration with the Benbowopka Treatment Centre, this paper describes a study protocol which aims to evaluate the effectiveness of blending Indigenous Healing Practices and Seeking Safety for the treatment of Indigenous patients with intergenerational trauma and substance use disorders. Methods: We will conduct a pre/post Quasi Experimental Community trial, to compare historical treatment outcomes for patients following the implementation of Indigenous Healing and Seeking Safety. We will conduct quantitative and qualitative analyses to understand the differences before and after the intervention is implemented. The pre- Indigenous Healing and Seeking Safety intervention study window will span from 2013 to 2016; n = 343, and the post-Indigenous Healing and Seeking Safety intervention study window from 2018 to 2020; n > 300. All participants will be enrolled in the Benbowopka residential treatment for the first time during the study periods. All data will be anonymized at the time of data entry. Propensity matching will be undertaken for patient characteristics, including sex/gender, age, and substance use type. Results and conclusions: The study findings could be used to inform intergenerational trauma and substance use disorders residential treatment programming for Indigenous communities across Canada. Our work will contribute to the field of community-based intergenerational trauma and substance use disorders programming by addressing objectives that consider: (a) the patient perspective, (b) the program perspective, and (c) the community perspective. The study findings may validate an innovative approach for evaluating the effectiveness of residential addiction treatment and particularly the effective and appropriate care for Indigenous patients with intergenerational trauma and substance use disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ongoing legal and social discrimination, and stigmatization of people with lived experience of drug use (PWLE) continues to contribute to overdose-related deaths in Canada. The involvement of PWLE working in harm reduction services has proven effective in decreasing drug-related harms among PWLE; however, there exist unintended negative impacts. PWLE working in harm reduction services risk overextending themselves beyond employment parameters (e.g., emotional labor) with few systems in place (e.g., employment advocacy) for support. While meaningful participation of PWLE in harm reduction programs is critical to addressing the overdose crisis, their labor in Canada's overdose response commands further investigation and recognition. This paper examines some of the benefits and negative aspects of working in harm reduction among PWLE. Methods: Fifty qualitative surveys were completed by PWLE working in harm reduction services from across Canada at the National 2018 Stimulus conference held in Edmonton, Alberta. The surveys focused on the benefits and negatives of 'peer' employment and recommendations for organizational transformation through short answer written sections. Surveys were analyzed thematically using NVivo, informed by critical perspectives on substance use, with attention to key re-occurring themes on employment equity. Results: While participants described multiple benefits of working in harm reduction services, such as the valuing of their expertise by fellow 'peers,' growing skill sets, countering stigma, and preventing overdose deaths, issues of workplace equity were significantly identified. Stigma, tokenism, workplace discrimination, including power and pay inequities, as well as lack of worker compensation and benefits were identified as key factors persisting in the everyday experiences of participants. Conclusion: Continued exposure to stigma, workplace discrimination, and/or power imbalances, combined with the impact of high stakes employment (e.g., dealing with overdose deaths), can have significant consequences for PWLE working in harm reduction, including burn out. Policy recommendations include large-scale structural changes that address inequities of hierarchical 'peer' employment for PWLE, including increased leadership roles for diverse PWLE, pay equity and benefits, unionization, as well as more supportive working environments attentive to the intersecting social-structural factors (poverty, criminalization, racism, gendered violence) impacting the everyday lives of PWLE working in harm reduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Reducing harms of youth substance use is a global priority, with parents identified as a key target for efforts to mitigate these harms. Much of the research informing parental responses to youth substance use are grounded in abstinence and critiqued as ineffective and unresponsive to youth contexts. Parental provision of substances, particularly alcohol, is a widely used approach, which some parents adopt in an attempt to minimize substance use harms; however, research indicates that this practice may actually increase harms. There is an absence of research exploring youth perspectives on parental approaches to substance use or the approaches youth find helpful in minimizing substance use-related harms. Methods: This paper draws on interviews with youth aged 13–18 (N = 89) conducted within the Researching Adolescent Distress and Resilience (RADAR) study in three communities in British Columbia, Canada. An ethnographic approach was used to explore youth perspectives on mental health and substance use within intersecting family, social, and community contexts. This analysis drew on interview data relating to youth perspectives on parental approaches to substance use. A multisite qualitative analysis (MSQA) was conducted to examine themes within each research site and between all three sites to understand how youth perceive and respond to parental approaches to substance use in different risk environment contexts. Results: Within each site, youths' experiences of and perspectives on substance use were shaped by their parents' approaches, which were in turn situated within local social, geographic, and economic community contexts. Youth descriptions of parental approaches varied by site, though across all sites, youth articulated that the most effective approaches were those that resonated with the realities of their lives. Zero-tolerance approaches were identified as unhelpful and unresponsive, while approaches that were aligned with harm reduction principles were viewed as relevant and supportive. Conclusions: Youth perspectives illustrate that parental approaches to substance use that are grounded in harm reduction principles resonate with young people's actual experiences and can support the minimization of harms associated with substance use. Evidence-based guidance is needed that supports parents and young people in adopting more contextually responsive harm reduction approaches to youth substance use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]