In England, UK, hospital admissions caused by bacterial infections associated with opioid use have increased annually since 2012, after 9 years of decline, mirroring trends in overdose deaths. The ...increase occurred among persons of both sexes and in all age groups and suggests preventive measures need reviewing.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, ODKLJ, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
In the United Kingdom, increases in premature mortality among the intersecting populations of people made homeless and people who inject drugs map onto the implementation and solidification of fiscal ...austerity policies over the past decade, rather than drug market fluctuations and trends as in North America. In this context, it is crucial to explore how poverty, multi-morbidity and care delay interplay in exacerbating vulnerability to mortality among an aging population of people who use illicit drugs. The mixed methods Care & Prevent study generated survey data with 455 PWID and in-depth qualitative interviews with a subsample (n = 36). Participants were recruited though drug treatment services and homeless hostels in London from October 2017–June 2019. This paper focuses on qualitative findings, analysed thematically and contextualised in relation to the broader survey sample. Survey participants report an extensive history of rough sleeping (78%); injecting-related bacterial infections (65%) and related hospitalisation (30%). Qualitative accounts emphasise engagement with the medical system as a ‘last resort’, with admission to hospital in a critical or a “near death” condition common. For many severe physical pain and debility were normalised, incorporated into the day to day. In a context of everyday violence and marginalisation, avoidance of medical care can have a protective impetus. Translation of cultural safety principles to care for people who inject drugs in hospital settings offers transformative potential to reduce serious health harms among this population.
•Without prompt care, injecting-related infections can progress to systemic illness.•People who inject drugs face multiple barriers to health care access.•Participants incorporated severe debility into their day-to-day lives.•In contexts of normalised violence medical care avoidance can be protective.•Cultural safety provides a framework to reduce injecting-related health harms.
Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) are a common but preventable cause of morbidity and mortality among people who inject drugs (PWID). They can be severe, and hospitalisations of PWID with SSTI ...are rising. The most common SSTI presentations are abscesses and cellulitis.
We used data from Care & Prevent, a cross-sectional community survey of PWID in London. We reported the lifetime prevalence of SSTI, severity of infections, key risk factors, and associated sequelae. Pictorial questions were used to assess SSTI severity.
We recruited 455 PWID. SSTI lifetime prevalence was high: 64% reported an abscess and/or cellulitis. Over one-third (37%) reported a severe infection, 137 (47%) reported hospitalisation. SSTIrisk factors were: aged 35+ years, injecting once or more times a day, subcutaneous or intra-muscular injections, and making four or more attempts to achieve an injection. Those who reported having other health conditions were at higher odds of having an abscess or cellulitis, with risk tending to increase with number of reported conditions. Half (46%) employed self-care for their worst SSTI, and 43% waited for ten or more days before seeking medical care or not seeking medical care at all.
Abscess and cellulitis are very common among PWID in London. We corroborate findings indicating SSTIs are associated with risks, e.g. venous access problems, as well as other co-morbid conditions: septicaemia, endocarditis, DVT, and kidney disease. These co-morbidities may impact SSTIs severity and outcomes. Delayed healthcare seeking potentially exacerbates infection severity, which in turn increases poorer health outcomes and complications.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
UK national guidance recommends systematic screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in under-served populations, including people experiencing homelessness and people who use drugs. This is ...not routinely implemented in the UK, and the reasons for this policy-practice mismatch remain underexplored.
Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 19 healthcare professionals from across the UK. Participants were recruited using purposive sampling and snowballing, identifying individuals with excellent knowledge of their regions practice and policy of LTBI management. The interviews were conducted online, and were audio recorded, with transcripts thematically analysed using a two-stage inductive coding process to explore perceived barriers and enablers to LTBI screening.
Most participants had previous experience managing LTBI in under-served populations, but none were conducting systematic screening as per national guidance. We identified service provision challenges and low prioritisation of LTBI as the key explanatory themes driving this policy-practice mismatch. Lack of resource, and the complexity of clinical decision making were two key service level barriers. System and service inertia, and lack of cost effectiveness evidence led to LTBI being deprioritised. Service integration and promotion of WHO targets for TB elimination were highlighted as potential solutions.
Integrating LTBI testing and treatment with existing health services for under-served populations could improve feasibility and efficacy. Promotion of UK TB elimination goals and generation of regional evidence to support commissioning for LTBI care is vital. Without such a multi-pronged approach inertia is likely to persist and the zeitgeist will remain: "it's too hard".
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
CEKLJ, DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Venous access is a priority for people who inject drugs (PWID). Damage and scarring of peripheral veins can exacerbate health harms, such as skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI), and promote ...transitions to femoral and subcutaneous injecting. Brown heroin available in Europe requires acidification for injection preparation. In this paper, we present mixed-methods data to explore our hypothesis of a link between overly acidic injection solutions, venous damage and SSTI risk.
We present a structured survey (n = 455) and in-depth qualitative interview (n = 31) data generated with PWID in London for the Care & Prevent study. Participants provided life history data and detail on injecting environments and drug preparation practices, including the use of acidifiers. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using a logistic regression for binary outcomes to explore associations between outcomes and excessive acidifier use. Grounded theory principles informed inductive qualitative analysis. Mixed-methods triangulation was iterative with results comparison informing the direction and questions asked of further analyses.
Of the 455 participants, most (92%) injected heroin and/or crack cocaine, with 84% using citric as their primary acid for drug preparation. Overuse of acidifier was common: of the 418 who provided an estimate, 36% (n = 150) used more than ½ a sachet, with 30% (n = 127) using a whole sachet or more. We found associations between acidifier overuse, femoral injecting and DVT, but not SSTI. Qualitative accounts highlight the role of poor heroin quality, crack cocaine use, information and manufacturing constraints in acidifier overuse. Painful injections and damage to peripheral veins were common and often attributed to the use of citric acid.
To reduce injecting-related injury and associated consequences, it is crucial to understand the interplay of environmental and practice-based risks underpinning venous damage among PWID. Overuse of acidifier is a modifiable risk factor. In the absence of structural supports such as safe injecting facilities or the prescribing of pharmaceutical diamorphine, there is an urgent need to revisit injecting paraphernalia design and distribution in order to alleviate health harms and distress among the most marginalised.
The United Kingdom is experiencing an increase in drug-related deaths and serious bacterial infections among its most vulnerable citizens. Cuts to essential services, coupled with a growing homeless ...population, create a challenging environment to tackle this public health crisis. In this paper, we highlight an underexplored environmental constraint faced by people living and injecting drugs on the streets. Access to water for injection is restricted in the UK, due to legislative and financial barriers. Austerity measures, such as public toilet closures, further restrict the ability of people made homeless to access clean water and protect themselves from health harms.
We generated questionnaire (n = 455) and in-depth qualitative interview (n = 32) data with people who inject drugs in London for the Care and Prevent study. Participants provided detail on their life history; drug use, injecting and living environments; health conditions and care seeking practices.
A high proportion of the survey sample reported lifetime history of street homelessness (78%), bacterial infections (65%) and related hospitalisation (30%). Qualitative accounts highlight unsafe, potentially dangerous, injection practices in semi-public spaces. Multiple constraints to sourcing sterile water for injection preparation were reported. Alternatives to sterile water included puddle water, toilet cistern water, whisky, cola soda and saliva. Participants who injected heroin and crack cocaine together unanimously reported adding water at two stages during injection preparation: first, adding water as a vehicle for heroin (which was then heated); second, adding cold water to the heroin mixture prior to adding the crack cocaine. This new finding of a stage addition of solvent may represent an additional risk of infection.
Currently, harm reduction equipment and resources for safe injecting are not meeting the needs of people who inject drugs who are street homeless or unstably housed. Preparation of injections with non-sterile water sources could precipitate bacterial and fungal infections, particularly when used without the application of heat. It is crucial that water for injection, also skin cleaning, is made available for the unstably housed and that harm reduction messaging is tailored to speak to the everyday realities of people who prepare and inject drugs in public spaces.
IntroductionInjecting-related bacterial and fungal infections are a common complication among people who inject drugs (PWID), associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Invasive infections, ...including infective endocarditis, appear to be increasing in incidence. To date, preventive efforts have focused on modifying individual-level risk behaviours (eg, hand-washing and skin-cleaning) without much success in reducing the population-level impact of these infections. Learning from successes in HIV prevention, there may be great value in looking beyond individual-level risk behaviours to the social determinants of health. Specifically, the risk environment conceptual framework identifies how social, physical, economic and political environmental factors facilitate and constrain individual behaviour, and therefore influence health outcomes. Understanding the social and structural determinants of injecting-related bacterial and fungal infections could help to identify new targets for prevention efforts in the face of increasing incidence of severe disease.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a systematic review. We will review studies of PWID and investigate associations between risk factors (both individual-level and social/structural-level) and the incidence of hospitalisation or death due to injecting-related bacterial infections (skin and soft-tissue infections, bacteraemia, infective endocarditis, osteomyelitis, septic arthritis, epidural abscess and others). We will include quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies. Using directed content analysis, we will code risk factors for these infection-related outcomes according to their contributions to the risk environment in type (social, physical, economic or political) and level (microenvironmental or macroenvironmental). We will also code and present risk factors at each stage in the process of drug acquisition, preparation, injection, superficial infection care, severe infection care or hospitalisation, and outcomes after infection or hospital discharge.Ethics and disseminationAs an analysis of the published literature, no ethics approval is required. The findings will inform a research agenda to develop and implement social/structural interventions aimed at reducing the burden of disease.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021231411.
Crack cocaine use is rising in the United Kingdom (UK), with smoking the primary form of administration. Provision of safe inhalation equipment for crack cocaine is prohibited under UK law. Pipes ...used for crack cocaine smoking are often homemade and/or in short supply, exacerbating COVID-19 transmission and respiratory risk. This is of concern, given high prevalence of respiratory health harms such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) among people who smoke illegal drugs. This commentary draws on scoping review and mixed method empirical evidence to argue for provision of safe crack inhalation equipment in the UK, with commensurate legal reform. Review of crack inhalation interventions illustrates the health protective and service engagement benefits of smoking equipment supply. Survey data generated with 455 people who inject drugs in London illustrate high prevalence of current crack use (66%, n=299). Qualitative accounts illustrate perceptions of relative smoking safety – alongside accounts of severe respiratory-related health harms. To date, injecting drug use has been of primary concern in relation to harm reduction initiatives. It is crucial that people who smoke illegal drugs are considered a vulnerable population in regard to COVID 19 transmission and fatality risk, with innovative harm reduction measures scaled up in response.
People who use heroin and other illicit opioids are at high risk of fatal overdose in the days after hospital discharge, but the reasons for this risk have not been studied.
We used the National ...Programme on Substance Abuse Deaths, a database of coroner reports for deaths following psychoactive drug use in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. We selected reports where the death occurred between 2010 and 2021, an opioid was detected in toxicology testing, the death was related to nonmedical opioid use, and death was either during an acute medical or psychiatric hospital admission or within 14 days after discharge. We used thematic framework analysis of factors that may contribute to the risk of death during hospital admission or after discharge.
We identified 121 coroners' reports; 42 where a patient died after using drugs during hospital admission, and 79 where death occurred shortly after discharge. The median age at death was 40 (IQR 34-46); 88 (73%) were male; and sedatives additional to opioids were detected at postmortem in 88 cases (73%), most commonly benzodiazepines. In thematic framework analysis, we categorised potential causes of fatal opioid overdose into three areas: (a) hospital policies and actions. Zero-tolerance policies mean that patients conceal drug use and use drugs in unsafe places such as locked bathrooms. Patients may be discharged to locations such as temporary hostels or the street while recovering. Some patients bring their own medicines or illicit opioids due to expectations of low-quality care, including undertreated withdrawal or pain; (b) high-risk use of sedatives. People may increase sedative use to manage symptoms of acute illness or a mental health crisis, and some may lose tolerance to opioids during a hospital admission; (c) declining health. Physical health and mobility problems posed barriers to post-discharge treatment for substance use, and some patients had sudden deteriorations in health that may have contributed to respiratory depression.
Hospital admissions are associated with acute health crises that increase the risk of fatal overdose for patients who use illicit opioids. Hospitals need guidance to help them care for this patient group, particularly in relation to withdrawal management, harm reduction interventions such as take-home naloxone, discharge planning including continuation of opioid agonist therapy during recovery, management of poly-sedative use, and access to palliative care.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Abstract Background Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have transformed the hepatitis C (HCV) treatment landscape. These highly effective drugs are, however, not available to all. In a context of DAA ...rationing, clinicians are advised to “manage patient expectations” about the benefits of a HCV cure. This directive particularly pertains to people with minimal liver damage and those who have ceased injecting: populations negated in contemporary prioritisation debates. Methods This paper engages with the assumptions underpinning HCV treatment prioritisation discourses to explore the concept of treatment ‘benefit’ from patient perspectives. Data are from a qualitative longitudinal study exploring treatment transitions and decision-making from 2012–2015. Participants comprised 28 people living with HCV, ten treatment providers and eight stakeholders, based in London, United Kingdom (UK). One hundred hours of clinic observations were conducted at two HCV treatment hospitals. Thematic analyses pertaining to treatment expectation and outcome inform this paper. Results Twenty-two participants commenced treatment. The majority who were unable to access DAAs chose to commence interferon-based treatment immediately rather than wait. Participants accounted for treatment urgency in relation to three interrelated narratives of hope and expectation. HCV treatment promised: social reconnection; social redemption and a return to ‘normality’. For many with successful treatment outcomes, these benefits appeared to be realised. Conclusion The DAA era heralds a discursive shift: from ‘managing interferon risk and difficulty’ to ‘managing DAA expense and expectation’. Calls to ‘manage patient expectations’ about the benefits of HCV cure are predicated on clinical benefits only, negating the social impacts of living with HCV. The public health priorities commonly articulated in treatment prioritisation debates are not consistent with those of people managing illness in their daily lives. During this ‘treatment revolution’ there is a need to be cognisant of the multiple publics living with the virus and the treatment needs of those who do not fit population-health scenarios.
PDF
