Perspectives of key interest groups regarding supervised Consumption sites (SCS) and novel virtual harm reduction services / overdose response hotlines and applications: a qualitative Canadian study
| dc.contributor.author | Seo, Boogyung | |
| dc.contributor.author | Rioux, William | |
| dc.contributor.author | Teare, Adrian | |
| dc.contributor.author | Rider, Nathan | |
| dc.contributor.author | Jones, Stephanie | |
| dc.contributor.author | Taplay, Pamela | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ghosh, S. M. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-08-01T09:06:22Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-08-01T09:06:22Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2024-07-27 | |
| dc.date.updated | 2024-08-01T09:06:22Z | |
| dc.description.abstract | Abstract Background Supervised consumption sites (SCS) and overdose prevention sites (OPS) have been implemented across Canada to mitigate harms associated with illicit substance use. Despite their successes, they still contend with challenges that limit their accessibility and uptake. Overdose response hotlines and apps are novel virtual technologies reminiscent of informal “spotting” methods that may address some of the limitations. Here, we strove to qualitatively examine the factors that may encourage or deter utilization of these virtual services and SCS. Methods A total of 52 participants across Canada were recruited using convenience and snowball sampling methods. These included people with lived and living experience of substance use, family members of people with lived experience, healthcare providers, community harm reduction workers, and virtual harm reduction operators. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted and inductive thematic analysis was performed to identify the themes pertaining to SCS and virtual harm reduction. Results Participants viewed overdose response hotline and apps as an opportunity to consume substances without being hindered by logistical barriers (e.g., wait times), fear of law enforcement, invasion of privacy, and more. They also noted that these virtual services provided more flexibility for clients who opt for routes of consumption that are not supported by SCS, such as smoking. Overall, SCS was perceived to be better than virtual services at facilitating social connection, providing additional resources/referrals, as well as prompt response to overdose. Conclusion In sum, participants viewed SCS and virtual services as filling different needs and gaps. This study adds to a growing body of literature which informs how virtual harm reduction services can serve as useful adjunct to more standard harm reduction methods. | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Harm Reduction Journal. 2024 Jul 27;21(1):141 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-024-01053-3 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1880/119323 | |
| dc.language.rfc3066 | en | |
| dc.rights.holder | The Author(s) | |
| dc.title | Perspectives of key interest groups regarding supervised Consumption sites (SCS) and novel virtual harm reduction services / overdose response hotlines and applications: a qualitative Canadian study | |
| dc.type | Journal Article |