“A place to be safe, feel at home and get better”: Including the experiential knowledge of potential users in the design of the first wet service in Montreal, Canada

BackgroundThe harmful use of alcohol is one of the leading health risk factors for people’s health worldwide, but some populations, like people who experience homelessness, are more vulnerable to its detrimental effects. In the past decades, harm reduction interventions that target these complex issues has been developed. For example, wet services include a wide range of arrangements (wet shelters, drop-in centers, transitory housing, etc.) that allow indoor alcohol use and Managed Alcohol Programs provide regulated doses of alcohol in addition to accommodation and services. Although the positive impacts of these interventions have been reported, little is known about how to integrate the knowledge of people experiencing homelessness and alcohol dependence into the design of such programs. The aim of this study is to present the findings of such an attempt in a first wet service in Montreal, Canada. MethodsCommunity based participatory research approach and qualitative methods–including semi-structured interviews and focus groups–were used to collect the knowledge of potential users (n = 34) of the wet service. The data collected was thematically analyzed. ResultsParticipants reported experiencing harsh living conditions, poverty, stigmatization and police harassment, which increased their alcohol use. The intersection between participants’ alcohol dependence and homelessness with the high barriers to access public services translated into their exclusion from several of such services. Participants envisioned Montreal’s wet service as a safe space to drink, a place that would provide multiple services, a home, and a site of recovery. ConclusionsIntegrating the knowledge of potential users into the design of harm reduction interventions is essential to develop better and more adapted services to meet complex needs. We propose that it could fosters users’ engagement and contribute to their sense of empower, which is crucial for a group that is typically discriminated against and suffers from marginalization.

Understanding best practices: A look into homelessness related alcoholism

Comorbidity of substance use disorders and homelessness is an ever present issue in the United States. Determining the best course of treatment for these individuals remains challenging. Here we highlight dominant models and theories explaining the relationships between substance abuse (specifically alcoholism) and homelessness, considering how they can and should inform strategies in the treatment of individuals facing homelessness and alcoholism. We review several models that have been developed to guide intervention strategies, from the traditional 12 steps to managed alcohol programs within low income communities to choice based programming within homeless shelters and rehab facilities. Data suggest that the best strategy continues to be programs that enhance individuals’ community support through peer based interactions. Though the perfect treatment within this isolated population is yet to be determined, future research should help to identify viable candidates.

“If I knew I could get that every hour instead of alcohol, I would take the cannabis”: need and feasibility of cannabis substitution implementation in Canadian managed alcohol programs

Background While there is robust evidence for strategies to reduce harms of illicit drug use, less attention has been paid to alcohol harm reduction for people experiencing severe alcohol use disorder (AUD), homelessness, and street-based illicit drinking. Managed Alcohol Programs (MAPs) provide safer and regulated sources of alcohol and other supports within a harm reduction framework. To reduce the impacts of heavy long-term alcohol use among MAP participants, cannabis substitution has been identified as a potential therapeutic tool. Methods To determine the feasibility of cannabis substitution, we conducted a pre-implementation mixed-methods study utilizing structured surveys and open-ended interviews. Data were collected from MAP organizational leaders (n = 7), program participants (n = 19), staff and managers (n = 17) across 6 MAPs in Canada. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to inform and organize our analysis. Results Five themes describing feasibility of CSP implementation in MAPs were identified. The first theme describes the characteristics of potential CSP participants. Among MAP participants, 63% (n = 12) were already substituting cannabis for alcohol, most often on a weekly basis (n = 8, 42.1%), for alcohol cravings (n = 15, 78.9%,) and withdrawal (n = 10, 52.6%). Most MAP participants expressed willingness to participate in a CSP (n = 16, 84.2%). The second theme describes the characteristics of a feasible and preferred CSP model according to participants and staff. Participants preferred staff administration of dry, smoked cannabis, followed by edibles and capsules with replacement of some doses of alcohol through a partial substitution model. Themes three and four highlight organizational and contextual factors related to feasibility of implementing CSPs. MAP participants requested peer, social, and counselling supports. Staff requested education resources and enhanced clinical staffing. Critically, program staff and leaders identified that sustainable funding and inexpensive, legal, and reliable sourcing of cannabis are needed to support CSP implementation. Conclusion Cannabis substitution was considered feasible by all three groups and in some MAPs residents are already using cannabis. Partial substitution of cannabis for doses of alcohol was preferred. All three groups identified a need for additional supports for implementation including peer support, staff education, and counselling. Sourcing and funding cannabis were identified as primary challenges to successful CSP implementation in MAPs.

Treatment Programs for Substance Use Disorder

Moderate to weak evidence suggests that patients with substance use disorders who received residential treatment were more likely than outpatients to complete treatment and be considered abstinent. Comparisons between residential treatment and outpatient programs for other outcomes were unclear. Strong- to weak-quality evidence showed that residential treatment services for patients with substance use disorders was effective in improving various outcomes including substance use, social, criminal activity, and mental health outcomes. However, residential treatment was likely associated with poorest survival outcomes after discharge compared to other treatments. Managed alcohol programs in hospital settings appeared to be effective and safe in preventing and treating alcohol withdrawal syndrome in surgical patients, trauma patients, or hospitalized patients. The level of evidence was not assessed. There was evidence that managed alcohol programs in community settings improved drinking patterns, alcohol-related harm, criminal activity, mental health, and social and physical well-being. The level of evidence was not assessed. The American Society of Addiction Medicine clinical practice guideline provides recommendations for the identification and management of alcohol withdrawal in inpatient and ambulatory settings. Patients’ current signs and symptoms, levels of risk for developing severe or complicated withdrawal or complications of withdrawal, and other dimensions should be taken into consideration in the assessment process to determine the appropriate level of care. Strength of recommendations was not assessed. The Canadian Coalition for Seniors’ Mental Health recommends that patients with cannabis use disorder should be considered for residential treatment if they are unable to effectively reduce or cease their cannabis use (level of evidence: Low; strength of recommendation: Strong).

Managed alcohol programs in the context of Housing First

Purpose Recently, Managed Alcohol Programs (MAPs have emerged as an alcohol harm reduction model for those living with severe alcohol use disorder (AUD) and experiencing homelessness. There is still a lack of clarity about the role of these programs in relation to Housing First (HF) discourse. The authors examine the role of MAPs within a policy environment that has become dominated by a focus on HF approaches to addressing homelessness. This examination includes a focus on Canadian policy contexts where MAPs originated and are still predominately located. The purpose of this paper is to trace the development of MAPs as a novel response to homelessness among people experiencing severe AUD and to describe the place of MAPs within a HF context. Design/methodology/approach This conceptual paper outlines the development of discourses related to persons experiencing severe AUD and homelessness, with a focus on HF and MAPs as responses to these challenges. The authors compare the key characteristics of MAPs with “core principles” and values as outlined in various definitions of HF. Findings MAPs incorporate many of the core values or principles of HF as outlined in some definitions, although not all. MAPs (and other housing/treatment models) provide critical housing and support services for populations who might not fit well with or who might not prefer HF models. Originality/value The “silver bullet” discourse surrounding HF (and harm reduction) can obscure the importance of programs (such as MAPs) that do not fully align with all HF principles and program models. This is despite the fact that MAPs (and other models) provide critical housing and support services for populations who might fall between the cracks of HF models. There is the potential for MAPs to help fill a gap in the application of harm reduction in HF programs. The authors also suggest a need to move beyond HF discourse, to embrace complexity and move toward examining what mixture of different housing and harm reduction supports are needed to provide a complete or comprehensive array of services and supports for people who use substances and are experiencing homelessness.

“There is a Place”: impacts of managed alcohol programs for people experiencing severe alcohol dependence and homelessness

Background The twin problems of severe alcohol dependence and homelessness are associated with precarious living and multiple acute, social and chronic harms. While much attention has been focused on harm reduction services for illicit drug use, there has been less attention to harm reduction for this group. Managed alcohol programs (MAPs) are harm reduction interventions that aim to reduce the harms of severe alcohol use, poverty and homelessness. MAPs typically provide accommodation, health and social supports alongside regularly administered sources of beverage alcohol to stabilize drinking patterns and replace use of non-beverage alcohol (NBA). Methods We examined impacts of MAPs in reducing harms and risks associated with substance use and homelessness. Using case study methodology, data were collected from five MAPs in five Canadian cities with each program constituting a case. In total, 53 program participants, 4 past participants and 50 program staff were interviewed. We used situational analysis to produce a series of “messy”, “ordered” and “social arenas” maps that provide insight into the social worlds of participants and the impact of MAPs. Results Prior to entering a MAP, participants were often in a revolving world of cycling through multiple arenas (health, justice, housing and shelters) where abstinence from alcohol is often required in order to receive assistance. Residents described living in a street-based survival world characterized by criminalization, unmet health needs, stigma and unsafe spaces for drinking and a world punctuated by multiple losses and disconnections. MAPs disrupt these patterns by providing a harm reduction world in which obtaining accommodation and supports are not contingent on sobriety. MAPs represent a new arena that focuses on reducing harms through provision of safer spaces and supply of alcohol, with opportunities for reconnection with family and friends and for Indigenous participants, Indigenous traditions and cultures. Thus, MAPs are safer spaces but also potentially spaces for healing. Conclusions In a landscape of limited alcohol harm reduction options, MAPs create a new arena for people experiencing severe alcohol dependence and homelessness. While MAPs reduce precarity for participants, programs themselves remain precarious due to ongoing challenges related to lack of understanding of alcohol harm reduction and insecure program funding.