The article, “A Qualitative Exploration of Attitudes Toward Global Positioning System Tracking and Ecological Momentary Assessment Among Individuals in Substance Use Treatment” has been published in SAj.

In this article, the authors detail their findings from qualitative interviews with 30 individuals in substance use treatment programs regarding their opinions on participating in a study that involved GPS tracking and ecological momentary assessment to better understand place-based, environmental factors that may predict substance use. The authors relay the concerns and benefits as described by participants and the resulting implications for this type of research. 

In the AUTHORS’ OWN WORDS, they relate the importance of their work:

“Few previous studies have used global positioning system (GPS) tracking in concert with ecological momentary assessment (ie, the use of mobile devices to administer frequent surveys on real-world experiences) to measure the real-time exposure to such triggers or their subsequent effects on return to use. This combination of tracking technology provides an opportunity to look at the duration and frequency of exposure to triggers and other aspects of the “environmental context” on recovery and return to use.⁶”

“To our knowledge, researchers have not explored in depth the attitudes and perceptions of people in SUD treatment on the use of such tracking technology, especially GPS tracking, for research purposes. Charron et al¹⁶ recently found high levels of acceptability for different sensing technologies, but did not examine attitudes toward more active methodologies (ie, ecological momentary assessment).”

The article, “Providers’ Experiences and Perspectives in Treating Patients With Co-Occurring Opioid and Stimulant Use Disorders in the Hospital,” has been published in SAj.

In this article, the authors detail their findings from qualitative interviews with 20 hospital-based providers with a focus on treating patients who co-use opioids and stimulants. Based on the interviews, the authors identified and discussed ways in which opioid and stimulant co-use creates challenges for substance use treatment. The article also outlines provider-level and system-level opportunities to improve treatment of co-occurring opioid and stimulant use disorders among patients in the hospital setting. 

In the AUTHORS’ OWN WORDS, they relate the importance of their work:

“Qualitative research can support the development and implementation of hospital-based care for patients with substance use disorders (SUDs). For example, qualitative research findings supported the development of hospital addiction consult services (ACS)⁸ and identified key barriers and facilitators to adoption at other hospitals.⁹ Similarly, a deeper understanding of physician perspectives, available through qualitative inquiry, has informed practice facilitation strategies to implement Emergency Department-based MOUD prescribing.^10,11”

“Despite a 13.4% increase in hospitalizations involving co-use between 2016 and 2018,³ and lower rates of treatment with MOUD,²¹,²² to our knowledge, there are no hospital care pathways specifically tailored for patients with co-use. A recent qualitative study of Veterans Affairs primary care providers’ experiences and perspectives treating patients with multiple SUDs identified barriers at the patient (e.g., life instability, stigma), provider (e.g., lack of knowledge or clear guidelines), and system levels (e.g., low accessibility to specialty SUD clinics providing MOUD).²³ However, patient presentations and healthcare delivery in the hospital may be substantially different than outpatient settings. Therefore, a deeper understanding of hospital providers’ experiences and perspectives is needed to inform the development and implementation of targeted services for hospitalized patients with co-use.”

The article, “Xylazine-Associated Wounds and Related Health Concerns Among People Who Use Drugs: Reports From Front-Line Health Workers in 7 US States,” has been published in SAj.

In this article, the author acknowledges the increasing prevalence of xylazine in the US drug supply and provides insight from front-line harm reduction and health care professionals on risk, recognition, and care of xylazine-associated wounds. The article also documents the health implications of xylazine exposure experienced by people who use drugs. Additionally, the author relates recommended priorities for xylazine-related research as identified by front-line professionals. 

In the AUTHORS’ OWN WORDS, they relate the importance of their work:

“Harm reduction organizations have been actively documenting and sharing lessons learned through direct service to people impacted by xylazine exposure, including knowledge related to xylazine withdrawal and xylazine-associated wounds.^26,27 Though this expert knowledge is insufficient to guide public health efforts alone, it is one of the 3 pillars of evidence-based practice alongside high-quality scientific evidence and meaningful input from directly impacted people.^28,29 Service providers who work for or with harm reduction organizations, therefore, represent an available, necessary, and largely untapped source of knowledge about the harms of xylazine exposure, the challenges those harms pose to patients and providers, and the most urgent priorities for xylazine-related scientific research.”

“As xylazine becomes more pervasive in the US drug supply, xylazine-associated wounds and related harms are being observed by front-line harm reduction professionals with increasing frequency. Conservative wound care strategies have been developed by front-line wound care providers, but more research into risk factors for these wounds, the biologic mechanisms of these wounds, and strategies for their prevention and treatment is urgently needed. Efforts to improve the management of xylazine withdrawal and reduce stigma against people who use drugs by incorporating harm reduction professionals into healthcare settings may also improve opportunities for engagement with many forms of care.”