Beliefs, Attitudes and Experiences of Virtual Overdose Monitoring Services from the Perspectives of People Who Use Substances in Canada: a Qualitative Study

Overview

Journal Harm Reduct J

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Pharmacology
Psychiatry

Date 2023 Jun 24

PMID 37355610

Authors

Tyler Marshall

Dylan Viste

Stephanie Jones

Julia Kim

Amanda Lee

Farah Jafri

Oona Krieg

S Monty Ghosh

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Solitary use of substances is a risk factor for substance use-related mortality. Novel e-health harm reduction interventions such as virtual overdose monitoring services (VOMS) have emerged in North America to improve access to emergency overdose support for people who use substances (PWUS). To date, little research has been published, and the perspectives of PWUS are needed to inform evaluation and policy efforts.

Objective: To explore the beliefs, values and perceptions of PWUS around using and accessing VOMS in Canada.

Methods: A qualitative study following grounded theory methodology was conducted. Using existing peer networks, purposive and snowball sampling was conducted to recruit PWUS (≥ 18 years) with previous experience with VOMS. Thematic analysis was used to analyze twenty-three interviews. Several methods were employed to enhance rigor, such as independent data coding and triangulation.

Results: Twenty-three one-on-one telephone interviews of PWUS with previous experience with VOMS were completed and analyzed. The following themes emerged: (1) feelings of optimism around VOMS to save lives; (2) privacy/confidentiality was highly valued due to stigma and fear of arrest; (3) concerns with reliable cell phones negatively impacting VOMS uptake; (4) concerns around emergency response times, specifically in rural/remote communities; (5) desire for trusting relationships with VOMS operators; (6) importance of mental health supports and referrals to psychosocial services; and (7) possible limited uptake due to low public awareness of VOMS.

Conclusion: This qualitative study provided novel insights about the VOMS from the perspectives of PWUS. PWUS generally felt optimistic about the potential of VOMS as a suitable harm reduction intervention, but several potential barriers around accessing VOMS were identified that may limit uptake. Future research is warranted.

Citing Articles

Using illicit drugs alone in Vancouver, Canada: a gender-based analysis.

Gallant K, Hayashi K, Sayre E, Choi J, Mansoor M, Kerr T Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2025; 20(1):9.

PMID: 39987447 PMC: 11846176. DOI: 10.1186/s13011-025-00637-x.

Artificial intelligence and social accountability in the Canadian health care landscape: A rapid literature review.

Anawati A, Fleming H, Mertz M, Bertrand J, Dumond J, Myles S PLOS Digit Health. 2024; 3(9):e0000597.

PMID: 39264934 PMC: 11392241. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000597.

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.

Seo B, Rioux W, Teare A, Rider N, Jones S, Taplay P Harm Reduct J. 2024; 21(1):141.

PMID: 39068494 PMC: 11282589. DOI: 10.1186/s12954-024-01053-3.

Implementing Canada's first national virtual phone based overdose prevention service: lessons learned from creating the National Overdose Response Service (NORS).

Rioux W, Taplay P, Morris-Miller L, Ghosh S Harm Reduct J. 2024; 21(1):102.

PMID: 38807227 PMC: 11131261. DOI: 10.1186/s12954-024-01017-7.

Accessibility gaps of physical supervised consumption sites in Canada motivating the use of overdose response technology/phone based virtual overdose response services: a retrospective cohort study.

Mocanu V, Viste D, Rioux W, Ghosh S Lancet Reg Health Am. 2024; 34:100770.

PMID: 38798948 PMC: 11127238. DOI: 10.1016/j.lana.2024.100770.

References

Potier C, Laprevote V, Dubois-Arber F, Cottencin O, Rolland B . Supervised injection services: what has been demonstrated? A systematic literature review. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2014; 145:48-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.10.012. View

Matskiv G, Marshall T, Krieg O, Viste D, Ghosh S . Virtual overdose monitoring services: a novel adjunctive harm reduction approach for addressing the overdose crisis. CMAJ. 2022; 194(46):E1568-E1572. PMC: 9828965. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.220579. View

Shirley-Beavan S, Roig A, Burke-Shyne N, Daniels C, Csak R . Women and barriers to harm reduction services: a literature review and initial findings from a qualitative study in Barcelona, Spain. Harm Reduct J. 2020; 17(1):78. PMC: 7574529. DOI: 10.1186/s12954-020-00429-5. View

Fernando S, Hawkins J, Kniseley M, Sikora M, Robson J, Snyder D . The Overdose Crisis and Using Alone: Perspectives of People Who Use Drugs in Rural and Semi-Urban Areas of British Columbia. Subst Use Misuse. 2022; 57(12):1864-1872. DOI: 10.1080/10826084.2022.2120361. View

Neale J, Allen D, Coombes L . Qualitative research methods within the addictions. Addiction. 2005; 100(11):1584-93. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01230.x. View

Hedegaard H, Minino A, Spencer M, Warner M . Drug Overdose Deaths in the United States, 1999-2020. NCHS Data Brief. 2022; (426):1-8. View

Akerblom K, Ness O . Peer Workers in Co-production and Co-creation in Mental Health and Substance Use Services: A Scoping Review. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2022; 50(2):296-316. PMC: 9931804. DOI: 10.1007/s10488-022-01242-x. View

Tsang V, Papamihali K, Crabtree A, Buxton J . Acceptability of technological solutions for overdose monitoring: Perspectives of people who use drugs. Subst Abus. 2019; 42(3):284-293. DOI: 10.1080/08897077.2019.1680479. View

Vindrola-Padros C, Chisnall G, Cooper S, Dowrick A, Djellouli N, Symmons S . Carrying Out Rapid Qualitative Research During a Pandemic: Emerging Lessons From COVID-19. Qual Health Res. 2020; 30(14):2192-2204. PMC: 7649912. DOI: 10.1177/1049732320951526. View

10.

Norton A, Hayashi K, Johnson C, Choi J, Milloy M, Kerr T . Injecting drugs alone during an overdose crisis in Vancouver, Canada. Harm Reduct J. 2022; 19(1):125. PMC: 9670082. DOI: 10.1186/s12954-022-00701-w. View

11.

Chapman A, Hadfield M, Chapman C . Qualitative research in healthcare: an introduction to grounded theory using thematic analysis. J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 2015; 45(3):201-5. DOI: 10.4997/JRCPE.2015.305. View

12.

Paumier R . Between zero risk and harm reduction: An ethnography of Montreal supervised injection services as a public policy instrument. Int J Drug Policy. 2022; 104:103694. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2022.103694. View

13.

Mattson C, ODonnell J, Kariisa M, Seth P, Scholl L, Gladden R . Opportunities to Prevent Overdose Deaths Involving Prescription and Illicit Opioids, 11 States, July 2016-June 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018; 67(34):945-951. PMC: 6124818. DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6734a2. View

14.

Perri M, Guta A, Kaminski N, Bonn M, Kolla G, Bayoumi A . Spotting as a risk mitigation method: A qualitative study comparing organization-based and informal methods. Int J Drug Policy. 2022; 111:103905. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2022.103905. View

15.

Perri M, Kaminski N, Bonn M, Kolla G, Guta A, Bayoumi A . A qualitative study on overdose response in the era of COVID-19 and beyond: how to spot someone so they never have to use alone. Harm Reduct J. 2021; 18(1):85. PMC: 8339679. DOI: 10.1186/s12954-021-00530-3. View

16.

Jack S . Utility of qualitative research findings in evidence-based public health practice. Public Health Nurs. 2006; 23(3):277-83. DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1446.2006.230311.x. View

17.

Kennedy M, Karamouzian M, Kerr T . Public Health and Public Order Outcomes Associated with Supervised Drug Consumption Facilities: a Systematic Review. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2017; 14(5):161-183. DOI: 10.1007/s11904-017-0363-y. View

18.

Donnell A, Unnithan C, Tyndall J, Hanna F . Digital Interventions to Save Lives From the Opioid Crisis Prior and During the SARS COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review of Australian and Canadian Experiences. Front Public Health. 2022; 10:900733. PMC: 9314644. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.900733. View

19.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J . Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007; 19(6):349-57. DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042. View

20.

Bardwell G, Strike C, Altenberg J, Barnaby L, Kerr T . Implementation contexts and the impact of policing on access to supervised consumption services in Toronto, Canada: a qualitative comparative analysis. Harm Reduct J. 2019; 16(1):30. PMC: 6498561. DOI: 10.1186/s12954-019-0302-x. View