Search

IntroductionAn increase in crystal methamphetamine (methamphetamine) use during the overdose epidemic is being observed in British Columbia (BC), Canada, and across North America. Concurrent use (ie, using uppers and downers one after the other or together) can increase the risk of fatal and non-fatal opioid overdose.ObjectivesWe investigated motivations for concurrent use of uppers and downers, specifically how (eg, in what order) and why people use concurrently, to identify potential interventions to prevent overdose and other harms.Setting and participantsThe 2019 Harm Reduction Client Survey was administered across 22 harm reduction supply distribution sites in BC (n=621). This thematic analysis examined 307 responses by people who affirmed concurrent use to classify order and reasons for using uppers and downers concurrently.ResultsOf the 307 people who responded ‘yes’ to concurrent use, 179 (58.3%) used downers then uppers, 76 (24.8%) used uppers then downers and 184 (59.9%) mixed uppers and downers together. Four main reasons for concurrent use emerged: self-medication, availability and preference, drug effects/properties, and financial and life situation. People who mixed drugs together predominantly wanted to achieve desired drug effects/properties, such as a specific high or balancing stimulating and sedating effects.ConclusionsThe ongoing rise in overdoses in BC is multifactorial, and the recent parallel increases in methamphetamine use and concurrent use with opioids may contribute. Qualitative interviews may further elucidate reasons for concurrent use. Addressing reasons for concurrent use identified in this study through harm reduction strategies and education may affect the rates of overdose morbidity and mortality.

During a public health overdose emergency driven by fentanyl in British Columbia (BC), Canada, a parallel increase in concurrent use of methamphetamines may be contributing to the risk of overdose. Concurrent use refers to the use of stimulants and opioids one after the other, or together. Describing substance use practices and elucidating correlates of concurrent use can inform harm reduction service provision and prevent overdose events.This cross-sectional study analyzed the 2019 Harm Reduction Client Survey administered at 22 harm reduction sites across BC and sampled individuals aged 19 and older. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression models identified correlates of concurrent use of stimulants and opioids in the last three days.The study sample was composed of 574 individuals who used stimulants and/or opioids, among whom 307 (53.5%) reported concurrent use. Compared with individuals who used stimulants and/or opioids separately, the odds of concurrent use were significantly increased (OR=2.74, 95%CI 1.71-4.51) while the adjusted odds were increased (aOR=1.79, 95%CI 0.98-3.34) among individuals who experienced an opioid overdose. Further, the adjusted odds of concurrent use decreased with every one-year increase in age (aOR=0.97, 95%CI 0.95-0.99), among individuals with paid work (aOR=0.58, 95%CI 0.33-0.99), and stable housing (aOR=0.61, 95%CI 0.37-1.02). The adjusted odds of concurrent use increased among individuals who used drugs daily (aOR=3.78, 95%CI 2.28-6.40), used tobacco (aOR=2.03, 95%CI 1.09-3.87), used benzodiazepines (aOR=3.72, 95%CI 1.76-8.41), owned a naloxone kit (aOR=1.94, 95%CI 1.15-3.31), used observed consumption sites (aOR=2.51, 95%CI 1.57-4.07), and were prescribed opioid agonist therapy (aOR=2.92, 95%CI 1.81-4.77).Individuals who used stimulants and opioids concurrently tend to be younger, without paid work or housing. They were engaged in harm reduction and treatment services, yet used illicit drugs with unknown concentration daily. Improving access to age-appropriate services and expanding the availability of both legal and regulated stimulants and opioids may further reduce harms of concurrent use.

The drug toxicity crisis continues to be a significant cause of death. Over 24,600 people died from opioid toxicity in Canada over the last 5 years. Safe supply programs are required now more than ever to address the high rate of drug toxicity overdose deaths caused by illicit fentanyl and its analogues. This study aims to identify opioid preferences and associated variables to inform further phases of safe supply program implementation.The Harm Reduction Client Survey, an annual cross-sectional survey of people who use drugs (PWUD), was administered at harm reduction supply distribution sites in BC in October-December 2019. The survey collects information on substance use patterns, associated harms, stigma, and utilization of harm reduction services. Eligibility criteria for survey participation included aged 19 years or older; self-reported substance use of any illicit substance in the past six months, and ability to provide verbal informed consent. We conducted multivariate logistic regression to investigate associations with opioid preference. We used the dichotomized preference for either heroin or fentanyl as an outcome variable. Explanatory variables of interest included: geographic region, urbanicity, gender, age category, Indigenous identity, housing, employment, witnessing or experiencing an overdose, using drugs alone, using drugs at an observed consumption site, injection as preferred mode of use, injecting any drug, frequency of use, and drugs used in last 3 days.Of the 621 survey participants, 405 reported a preferred opioid; of these 57.8% preferred heroin, 32.8% preferred fentanyl and 9.4% preferred prescription opioids. The proportion of participants who preferred heroin over fentanyl significantly increased with age. The adjusted odds of a participant 50 or older preferring heroin was 6.76 (95% CI: 2.78-16.41, p-value:0.01) times the odds of an individual 29 or under. The adjusted odds of an Indigenous participant reporting a preference for heroin compared to fentanyl was 1.75 (95% CI: 1.03-2.98, p-value: 0.04) the odds of a non-Indigenous participant reporting the same. Adjusted odds of heroin preference also differed between geographic regions within British Columbia, Canada.Opioid preference differs by age, geographic area, and Indigenous identity. To create effective safe supply programs, we need to engage PWUD about their drugs of choice.