10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The Perfect Storm: COVID-19, mass incarceration and the opioid epidemic

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Overcrowding, poor hygiene, and inadequate access to medical care make correctional facilities particularly vulnerable to COVID-19. As of May 15, 2020, there have been 7,671 laboratory confirmed cases, and 103 deaths among inmates and correctional staff in the United States (US) (Wallace et al., 2020), and over 56,000 cases and 987 deaths, globally (Justice Project Pakistan, 2020). In the US, jails and prisons are responsible for a large proportion of COVID-19 infections, with over 25,000 cases connected to correctional facilities to date (New York Times, 2020). People with opioid use disorders (OUDs) are disproportionately incarcerated and suffer from a number of pre-existing conditions, creating a ‘perfect storm’ for a COVID-19 outbreak. Furthermore, COVID-19 capitalizes on inequity (Wang & Tang, 2020), and the epidemic of mass incarceration has resulted in a number of social, economic and health inequities. The conditions within correctional facilities make it infeasible to enact many of the World Health Organization's recommended COVID-19 prevention strategies (World Health Organization, 2020). Infection control measures like social distancing, hand washing, and quarantine are near impossible in densely populated jails and prisons, where the majority of inmates share cells and other communal spaces. Correctional facilities are also notoriously unsanitary, lack adequate ventilation or cleaning supplies, and inmates often have restricted access to soap and running water. Over a quarter of criminal justice involved populations in the US are charged with a drug offense (Rabuy, 2016), and it is estimated that 65% of the US prison population has a substance use disorder (CASA, 2010). Globally, it is estimated that one in six are serving time for drug possession (Burki, 2020), and between 10-60% have a substance use disorder (Carpentier, Royuela, Montanari, & Davis, 2018). Populations most vulnerable to COVID-19 include older adults and persons of any age with serious underlying medical conditions such as lung disease, heart disease, and diabetes. Among people who use drugs, COVID-19 infection may worsen the respiratory impact of opioid use and withdrawal, as opioids act in the brainstem to slow breathing, leading to respiratory depression and potential overdose (Boom et al., 2012). Those with substance use disorders also experience greater co-morbidities, including cardiovascular disease (Thylstrup, Clausen, & Hesse, 2015), or be immunocompromised due to HIV (Azbel & Altice, 2018). Similarly, detained populations have higher prevalence of infectious and chronic diseases, and poorer health than the general population, even at younger ages (Centers for Disease Control, 2020). Many are also immunocompromised, and the prevalence of HIV is nearly four times higher within criminal justice settings, compared to the general community (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2003). These issues are further compounded by poor access to medical care. The Federal ban on Medicaid in correctional facilities has resulted in out of pocket co-payments that are the equivalent of $200-500 for a medical visit, making most medical care cost prohibitive (Prison Policy Initiative, 2020). Furthermore, correctional facilities concentrate, amplify, and then transmit infectious diseases to the community after release, and will continue to do so for COVID-19. This is illustrated by a prior study examining prison to community transmission of tuberculosis (TB) in Brazil, which found high rates of within prison transmission, and subsequently found that over half (54%) of all TB strains in the community originated from former inmates (Sacchi et al., 2015). It is estimated that American jails have a 54% turnover with approximately 200,000 inmates cycling in and out every week (Flagg & Neff, 2020), in addition to the correctional staff, medical staff, visitors, lawyers and volunteers. This provides ample opportunity for the virus to both enter and exit criminal justice systems. Flattening the curve will require criminal justice reform The US has the largest prison population in the world, with 2.3 million people incarcerated at any given time. Jails alone are responsible for admitting 10.6 million people every year, and over half a million inmates are not convicted, but are held in pre-trial detention because they cannot afford bail (Sawyer W, 2020). Globally, this number exceeds 3 million, and those held in pre-trial detention are particularly vulnerable to infectious diseases like COVID-19 due overcapacity and inadequate health services (Open Society Justice Initiative, 2011). The Centers for Disease Control and World Health Organization have released interim guidance for COVID-19 prevention and control within correctional facilities that include risk communication, screening, social distancing, medical isolation or quarantine, operations guidance, and the use of personal protective equipment (Centers for Disease Control, 2020; World Health Organization, 2020). In addition to prevention and control measures, we must implement a strategic decarceration plan that incorporates bail and drug policy reform, limit the number of new arrests, and overhaul the parole review process to reduce face-to-face visits and technical violations. To limit the spread of the virus, jurisdictions have had varying responses that include eliminating medical co-pays, restricting visitations, reducing the cost of phone and video calls, and limiting the number of people incarcerated (Prison Policy Initiative, 2020). In the US, all but four states have suspended or reduced medical co-pays during incarceration to promote COVID-19 testing and care. In order to limit the number of people incarcerated, counties such as Baltimore, MD or King County, WA are dismissing criminal charges for anyone arrested for non-violent offenses. Some cities such as Los Angeles, Philadelphia and Denver, are using cite and release policies or delaying arrests; and several states (Oklahoma, California, Illinois) are halting all new admissions to state prisons. Several jurisdictions have also made plans to release the most vulnerable prisoners, including the elderly, and those with a history of chronic or respiratory illnesses, those held in pre-trial detention, those with limited time remaining in their sentence, and those charged with non-violent crimes. Los Angeles and New York City have managed to reduce its jail population by nearly 30%, and the governor of New York has released approximately 2% of the state prison population to limit the spread of COVID-19. The current spread of COVID-19 may outpace criminal justice reform, however; and some countries have granted temporary release of inmates, with approximately 35% of inmates in Iran and 31% in Turkey on furlough (Pakes, 2020). The risk of COVID-19 does not end with decarceration Reducing the size of criminal justice populations protects inmates from acquiring COVID-19 during incarceration, however, a lack of careful discharge planning during community reentry threatens to increase the risk of COVID-19 infection, subsequent community transmission, and exacerbate existing epidemics of opioid use, HIV and inequality. Given the high-risk environment correctional facilities pose, recently released inmates will also have to self-quarantine for a minimum of 14 days in order to limit community transmission. One solution to this is to temporarily house the homeless and former inmates in empty hotels and motels. Some states like New York and California are temporarily housing homeless people released from jails in empty hotels and motels to allow for social distancing and provide access to basic hygiene (Vansickle, 2020). In California specifically, the governor has instituted Project Roomkey to safely isolate those experiencing homelessness with aid from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). This approach requires coordination between government officials, case managers, social workers and hotel management, and may not solve the homelessness crisis nor offers permanent housing options beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Quarantining formerly incarcerated inmates in hotels or motels provides a safer alternative to home confinement, however, by preventing subsequent transmission of COVID-19 into the community. This solution would also allow for appropriate discharge planning that includes continuity of care and linkage to longer-term housing and harm reduction services for people with substance use disorders. Downstream consequences of COVID-19 People with opioid and other substance use disorders are disproportionately incarcerated, and recently released prisoners are ten times more likely to be homeless. Without adequate planning, decarceration efforts in response to COVID-19 may move people with OUDs from one risk environment to another. Upon release, the risks associated with COVID-19, as well as HIV, viral hepatitis, TB, overdose and homelessness that often accompany incarceration must be considered. This includes re-entry services that comprise of overdose prevention, continuity of care, linkage to community-based substance use treatment, and safe housing (American Association of Addiction Medicine, 2020). The risk of opioid overdose death is 40 times higher in the two weeks immediately following release (Ranapurwala et al., 2018). This is attributable to forced drug abstinence during incarceration which reduces drug tolerance upon release, and a change in the potency of opioids that is primarily driven by the availability of fentanyl. Disruption of the illegal drug supply due to border restrictions as a COVID-19 control measure may lead greater use of fentany, and several counties are already reporting spikes in fentanyl and opioid overdose rates (American Medical Association, 2020). People who inject drugs often inject in groups to avoid fatal overdose, yet, this strategy now exposes them to COVID-19. Several studies have also noted elevated substance use after a natural disaster or mass traumatic event (Cerdá, Tracy, & Galea, 2011; Richman, Wislar, Flaherty, Fendrich, & Rospenda, 2004; Strathdee et al., 2006), and the COVID-19 pandemic threatens to trigger a fourth wave of opioid overdose deaths in the US. Nearly half of all harm reduction programs in the US report reduced services due to staff shortages and lack of personal protective equipment (Glick et al., 2020). Disruption of harm reduction programs due to COVID-19 may lead to increased sharing of injection equipment, thereby increasing the risk of HIV and HCV, and of non-injection equipment like cookers, pipes and vapes, increasing the risk of COVID-19. Harm reduction programs remain essential services, and their continued accessibility during the pandemic ensures access to sterile drug use equipment, medication-assisted treatment and overdose education and naloxone distribution. These are vital for reducing the risk of COVID-19 transmission within drug using networks, managing chronic conditions such as HIV or viral hepatis, and reducing the risk of overdose among people with OUDs, especially upon community re-entry. Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity to accelerate criminal justice reform that is already underway. Urgent national response is needed as correctional staff and incarcerated populations are disproportionately infected with COVID-19, and because justice-involved populations face additional disparities that make them more vulnerable to COVID-19. First, jails and prisons must rapidly decarcerate by releasing medically vulnerable populations, expand bail and drug policy reform to release low-level offenders, those held in pre-trial detention and those with limited time remaining; and discontinue the use of out of pocket co-payments for medical care, while increasing the provision of quality healthcare within correctional facilities. Second, we must reduce new admissions by limiting the number of arrests for non-violent crimes, drug-related offenses and technical violations. Finally, accelerating the parole review process and reducing the number of in-person visits for those in community supervision reduces face-to-face contact, transportation issues, and disruptions to employment that often result in technical violations. Furthermore, many of these policy changes may have long-term implications beyond COVID-19 prevention and control, including a reduction in social, economic and health disparities that are often the result of incarceration. Criminal justice reform alone is not enough to curb COVID-19 if prevention measures are not in place upon community re-entry. Adequate discharge planning and re-entry services will be crucial for reducing community transmission of COVID-19, as well as preventing HIV, hepatitis, TB, and overdose that often accompany incarceration. We recommend jurisdictions allocate funding and other resources to temporarily quarantine inmates in empty hotels and motels to allow for adequate discharge planning that includes insurance enrollment, linkage to harm reduction and other community services to manage substance use disorders, ensure continuity of care, and temporarily relieve homelessness. COVID-19 threatens to exacerbate already existing epidemics of opioid use, HIV and inequality that have been created and sustained prior to the pandemic. This strategy offers a multi-faceted solution to a complex problem that is mutually beneficial for former inmates, their families and the greater community at large for the duration of the pandemic, and may reduce social, economic and health disparities that result from incarceration in the long run. Funding This study was supported by award number T32AI114398 from the National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health Declaration of Competing Interest All authors declare no conflicts of interest.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Combating COVID-19: health equity matters

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Impact of COVID-19 on Syringe Services Programs in the United States

            Syringe services programs (SSPs) were established in the 1980s to prevent HIV transmission among people who inject drugs (PWID) and have become a primary intervention point for other preventive and treatment services [1–4]. The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated social distancing measures have dramatically changed operations at many SSPs. The impact of these changes could halt, or even reverse, the tremendous progress made by SSPs during the HIV/AIDS epidemic [1]. At the same time, the pandemic also presents an opportunity for some SSPs to provide COVID-19 screening, linkage to testing, and policy adaptations to better serve PWID. We conducted a rapid mixed methods assessment of SSP response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States (U.S.) to quantify and characterize changes in services provided by SSPs and the potential impact on PWID. Quantitative data were collected by the North American Syringe Exchange Network (NASEN), which maintains a directory of SSPs in the U.S. On March 31, 2020, NASEN emailed a short electronic survey to SSPs in the directory that asked a question about changes in SSP operations. Survey completion was voluntary and not incentivized. We analyzed data collected through April 16, 2020. Qualitative data were collected through interviews with SSP program staff and public health staff who support SSP activities in their jurisdictions. The research team conducted interviews with staff from a purposive sample of early COVID-19 hot spots including Detroit, New Orleans, New York City, Philadelphia, and Seattle. Interviewers used a semi-structured interview guide, and all participants provided informed consent. Most interviews were conducted and recorded using Zoom videoconferencing software. For this rapid, interim analysis, the qualitative data were analyzed by the interviewers for major themes. All data collected for this study pertained to programs, not individuals, thus this study did not constitute human subjects research or require review by an IRB. Findings from Our Quantitative Survey Among the 173 SSPs that responded to the NASEN survey, 43% reported a decrease in availability of services due to COVID-19. Many programs reported that these decreased services included medication for opioid use disorder and testing and treatment services for HIV, hepatitis C virus (HCV), and sexually transmitted infections. One-quarter (25%) of responding SSPs reported that one or more of their sites had closed due to COVID-19. Write-in responses suggested that factors related to SSP closures included staff safety, staff shortage, and instructions from administrative sponsors. SSPs also reported changing their service delivery model in response to COVID-19. Over one-half (53%) of SSPs are prepacking all supplies for participants, 20% are providing delivery services or only delivery services, and 6% are providing mail-based services. Write-in responses indicated that programs are increasing the amount of supplies provided to clients, usually 2–4 weeks’ worth at a time. Over one-quarter (27%) of SSPs reported that they are screening participants for COVID-19 symptoms. Findings from Our Qualitative Interviews Five key themes emerged from this interim analysis of data from qualitative interviews of SSP staff in five COVID-19 hotspots (Detroit, Philadelphia, New Orleans, New York City, and Seattle). Programs have Adapted to Maximize the Safety of Their Staff and Participants To reinforce social distancing practices and minimize the number of participant visits, programs have increased distribution of syringes, works, and naloxone. In some circumstances, this reflected a change in a program’s syringe distribution model from one-for-one (more restrictive) to needs-based (less restrictive). One large program allows in one participant at a time in its fixed site location, is prepackaging supplies, and is limiting visits to a few minutes. Another program moved its indoor exchange activities to an outdoor space, and some programs are trying to provide food for clients. In certain jurisdictions, SSP clients can initiate buprenorphine treatment and receive prescriptions through a telemedicine hotline. Several programs have reduced staffing, and some staff have been unable to work due to their own elevated risk for complications from COVID-19. Staff are often former drug users, some of whom have serious pre-existing conditions, and many are very concerned about acquiring COVID-19. SSPs have PPE for staff, but programs reported limited supplies (e.g., staff are wearing bandanas) and nearly all are concerned about maintaining adequate supply levels. SSP Demand Remains High Most SSPs in our sample reported that the number of participants seeking services has declined since social distancing measures were implemented, while one small program reported a dramatic increase in participants since nearly all other nearby SSPs had closed. However, when data were available, programs reported that the number of syringes distributed had remained level or had increased due to distributing more supplies to each participant, including through secondary exchange (i.e., providing supplies to peers to distribute to others). SSPs Remain Essential Services for PWID, But This is Not Always Recognized Some jurisdictions have explicitly designated SSPs as essential services. SSPs in other states have continued to operate through collaborations with other essential services. Nearly all SSP staff noted that policy makers and leadership had not included SSPs in jurisdictional emergency planning and response and were not able to provide informed guidance on the expectations for SSPs. Instead, program managers have been empowered to implement changes autonomously and involve SSP staff in these decisions. Several programs have utilized guidance on best practices in the COVID-19 era from large harm reduction organizations. Multiple organizations stated they hope this experience increases the visibility of the public health importance of SSPs. Syringe and Naloxone Distribution have been Prioritized, While HIV and HCV Testing have Declined SSPs noted the importance of ensuring that participants have sufficient injection equipment and naloxone, and had developed protocols for distributing supplies that minimize close contact with participants. Conversely, because testing for HIV and HCV requires direct contact, nearly all programs said that testing availability had declined or been eliminated. In one city, testing staff were diverted to responding to a concurrent outbreak of hepatitis A among PWID. SSPs can Provide COVID-19 Related Services to a Vulnerable Population SSPs in most of the five jurisdictions we interviewed were conducting some screening for COVID-19 among their participants. Larger programs have been able to partner with organizations to implement more routinized screening, and at least one SSP was able to refer symptomatic participants to a COVID-19 testing station behind their building. Conclusion This rapid assessment of the response of SSPs to the COVID-19 pandemic revealed an urgent and dramatic shift in critical prevention services provided to PWID. Data were collected less than one month after most jurisdictions in the U.S. began implementing stringent social distancing guidance and stay-at-home orders. During those few weeks, approximately one-quarter of SSPs in this sample reported closing at least one site. The rapid closure of many SSPs highlights the thin margins on which many of these programs operate [5]. These closures could potentially have profound negative impacts on the health of PWID. The risk of fatal opioid overdose may increase due to decreased naloxone distribution. A reduction in sterile injection equipment available to PWID may increase risk for HIV, HCV, and other infectious consequences of injection drug use. Disruptions in the availability of HIV and HCV testing will further increase the likelihood of ongoing transmission in communities. Additionally, SSPs often provide direct or indirect linkage to treatment for substance use disorders, and the inability of PWID to access these services further increases their risk of morbidity and mortality. The consequences of COVID-19 among SSPs have also produced opportunities for ingenuity and have pointed a spotlight on the fortitude of these programs. Most programs that remain open have made changes to their service delivery model to minimize contact between participants and staff. Indeed, several SSPs reported distributing more syringes and naloxone than before. These interventions are aligned with current best practices for SSPs and could save lives [6, 7]. These programs indicated the desire to retain these changes after the COVID-19 response ends and use this period to experiment and demonstrate the feasibility of these new models. Finally, SSPs stressed the importance of their connections with populations with environmental and structural risk factors for serious COVID-19 sequelae, and their commitment to continuing to serve these participants. These connections present the opportunity to offer COVID-19 screening and testing, which some programs are already doing. Moreover, if a vaccine for COVID-19 is developed, SSPs may provide a critical venue for the rapid administration of vaccine to historically marginalized and hard-to-reach populations. While SSPs are to be admired for their resiliency and ingenuity in the present COVID-19 pandemic situation, the problems presently facing SSPs must not be underestimated. Clients are likely to have great difficulty social distancing and “staying at home;” most will need to obtain drugs to avoid withdrawal and many remain homeless. Many SSPs have closed and those that remain open have greatly reduced their services, are struggling to procure sufficient PPE for staff, and have been forced to reduce testing for blood borne pathogens, a change that could lead to increasing rates of HIV and HCV among an already vulnerable population.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Non-analgesic effects of opioids: opioid-induced respiratory depression.

              Opioids induce respiratory depression via activation of μ-opioid receptors at specific sites in the central nervous system including the pre-Bötzinger complex, a respiratory rhythm generating area in the pons. Full opioid agonists like morphine and fentanyl affect breathing with onset and offset profiles that are primarily determined by opioid transfer to the receptor site, while the effects of partial opioid agonists such as buprenorphine are governed by transfer to the receptor site together with receptor kinetics, in particular dissociation kinetics. Opioid-induced respiratory depression is potentially fatal but may be reversed by the opioid receptor antagonist naloxone, an agent with a short elimination half-life (30 min). The rate-limiting factor in naloxone-reversal of opioid effect is the receptor kinetics of the opioid agonists that requires reversal. Agents with slow dissociation kinetics (buprenorphine) require a continuous naloxone infusion while agents with rapid kinetics (fentanyl) will show complete reversal upon a single naloxone dose. Since naloxone is non-selective and will reverse analgesia as well, efforts are focused on the development of compounds that reverse opioid-induced respiratory depression without affecting analgesic efficacy. Such agents include ampakines and serotonin agonists which are aimed at selectively enhancing central respiratory drive. A novel approach is aimed at the reduction of respiratory depression from opioid-activation of (micro-)glia cells in the pons and brainstem using micro-glia cell stabilizers. Since this approach simultaneously enhances opioid analgesic efficacy it seems an attractive alternative to the classical reversal strategies with naloxone.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Int J Drug Policy
                Int. J. Drug Policy
                The International Journal on Drug Policy
                Published by Elsevier B.V.
                0955-3959
                1873-4758
                11 June 2020
                11 June 2020
                : 102819
                Affiliations
                [a ]Columbia Mailman School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, New York, New York, USA
                [b ]Columbia School of Social Work, Social Intervention Group, New York, New York, USA
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author: Columbia Mailman School of Public Health, 722 W 168th St, New York, NY 10032 tm2925@ 123456cumc.columbia.edu
                Article
                S0955-3959(20)30160-2 102819
                10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.102819
                7287479
                32560975
                19f9a2cb-c454-438d-ba5e-63f87fb7d76c
                © 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Social policy & Welfare
                Social policy & Welfare

                Comments

                Comment on this article