7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Rapid Implementation of Service Delivery Changes to Mitigate COVID-19 and Maintain Access to Methadone Among Persons with and at High-Risk for HIV in an Opioid Treatment Program

      editorial

      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

          Medication treatment for opioid use disorder with methadone and buprenorphine is a key HIV prevention strategy [1–5]. Enrollment in medication treatment for opioid use disorder is associated with reductions in injection drug use [6–8], syringe/equipment sharing [6–9], and risky sexual behavior [6, 9]. Among people living with HIV, engagement in medication treatment for opioid use disorder is associated with HIV-risk behavior reductions [10, 11], and higher rates of initiating and adhering to antiretroviral treatment (ART) [12–15]. As such, this modality is associated with lower prevalence and incidence rates of HIV itself [16–19]. Many parts of the country, including Seattle, have witnessed outbreaks of HIV among persons who inject drugs related to the opioid crisis [20–23]. Given that medication treatment for opioid use disorder plays a critical role in protecting opioid users from HIV, ensuring continuous medication treatment for opioid use disorder treatment is imperative to help safeguard these individuals from acquiring HIV. Furthermore, this modality of treatment helps those living with HIV to continue to experience its benefits on ART adherence, and promotes HIV control within the surrounding community. The COVID-19 pandemic represents challenges for continuing opioid treatment services while observing social distancing directives. Here we describe the experience of one Opioid Treatment Program in rapidly creating and implementing policies that balance the safety of patients and staff with uninterrupted access to methadone. We use meeting minutes, personal communications, and written policies to describe: (1) measures adopted at the Opioid Treatment Program to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 while preserving core services to patients; (2) implementation of clinical decision-making strategies aimed at maintaining patient and community safety; and (3) changes in clinic patient flow. Opioid Treatment Programs Opioid Treatment Programs are federally certified and accredited settings in which medications targeting opioid use disorder are provided. They serve individuals with severe opioid use disorder, providing a vital landing place for injection drug users, as well as a conduit for HIV testing and treatment [24]. Treatment provided in Opioid Treatment Programs is different than that of office-based medication treatment as: (1) Opioid Treatment Programs are the only settings in which methadone can be dispensed to treat opioid use disorder; and (2) they have highly regulated dispensaries in which patients come for frequent (i.e., daily for many patients), observed dosing. Longstanding regulations surrounding unsupervised (“take-home”) medications are determined on a federal-level [25], and may be subject to further restrictions at the treatment program. The assumption is that daily or frequent supervised dosing enhances safety by reducing risk of medication poisonings and diversion. However, these same policies necessitate large numbers of patients congregating in small spaces for extended periods of time before dispersing to their communities, presenting challenges to infection control. Opioid Treatment Program Response to COVID-19 The country’s first SARS-CoV-2 case was confirmed in Washington State, as was the first COVID-19 death. In response, Evergreen Treatment Services—the largest Opioid Treatment Program in Washington State—underwent swift mobilization to develop plans for the impending pandemic. The organization grappled with the dilemma of serving 2630 patients while attempting to minimize physical contact in cramped quarters. Evergreen Treatment Services not only provides medication treatment for opioid use disorder, but also offers an array of critical psychosocial and medical services including HIV screening and referral to treatment. This setting is comprised of three sites, the largest of which (n = 1380 patients) is located in Seattle, King County, a geographic region in which numerous COVID-19 cases were first identified. This urban site serves among the most vulnerable individuals in the community, with 13 patients known to be living with HIV and up to 63% reporting homelessness. For many patients, the Opioid Treatment Program is “home base” serving as a consistent setting in which to interface with a medical and counseling professionals, as well as a trusted source for referral to outside services like HIV treatment. Maintaining its core services, this clinic helps people reduce drug use and other HIV risk behaviors, solidifying its role in community HIV prevention. In February, 2020 Washington State’s Governor declared the state’s COVID-19 outbreak a public health emergency. Evergreen Treatment Services assembled a trans-disciplinary Infection Control Committee, and initial planning involved preparation around site readiness including personal protective equipment, medication stocks, sanitation, signage/communication, and managing congestion. Policies were clarified and codified around: patient COVID-19 screening, separating symptomatic patients, limiting human contact, messaging around universal precautions/hygienic practices, and defining “essential” staff and services. At an Opioid Treatment Program, social distancing is made difficult by the reality that most patients engage in almost daily medication dosing. Phase II planning aimed to address this issue by modifying eligibility requirements for take-home doses, increasing the amount of take-homes provided, while balancing the risks of possible medication diversion and drug poisonings (both patients and community members). Opioid Treatment Programs cannot unilaterally relax take-home policies without submitting an exception request to the State Opioid Treatment Authority, housed at the Health Care Authority and SAMHSA’s Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. To begin this process, Evergreen Treatment Services proposed take-home status changes for five categories of methadone patients: (1) patients endorsing COVID-19 symptoms (assessed by medical provider) or confirmed disease receive up to 2 weeks of medication; (2) patients who have earned at least one take-home dose (garnered by demonstration of treatment stability using measures including negative urine drug tests and regular medication dosing) receive 1 week’s worth of medication; (3) patients over 60 or with medical co-morbidities would be eligible for 1–2 weeks’ worth of medication; (4) patients who are deemed unsafe to manage take-homes continue daily dosing; and (5) all other patients who are not in one of the above categories are put on a staggered take-home schedule whereby half the patients present in-person Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and the other half on opposite days; remaining doses provided as take-homes. These categories were outlined in a comprehensive Infection Control Response document, which was submitted to SAMHSA as a supporting document for the exception. At the same time, the Health Care Authority was working with the Governor’s Office and the Washington State Congressional delegation to bring attention to the list of urgent policy exceptions that had been requested to assure programs had the flexibility they needed to safely protect staff and patients. On 3/13/2020, SAMHSA released Evergreen Treatment Services’ infection response document as guidance for all Washington State Opioid Treatment Programs [26], after which the exemption was approved and implemented. On 3/16/2020 SAMHSA released adjusted rules governing Opioid Treatment Programs, allowing states to: (1) request blanket exceptions for all stable patients to receive 28-day take-home dosing and; (2) request up to 14-day take-home dosing for less stable patients, but who the Opioid Treatment Program believes can safely handle that level [27]. Clinical Decision Making During COVID-19 In practice, the most complicated elements of implementing infection control response have been determining which patients are “unstable”. Medical providers make determinations around patient stability on a case-by-case basis, some of which are clearly articulated within the documentation parameters, such as an inability to safely take safely medication daily due to a cognitive or psychiatric condition, or inability to keep medication safe due to a chaotic living situation. Yet numerous cases required lengthy and ongoing consultation among medical providers and clinical leadership. For example, individuals living with HIV are some of the most medically complicated patients at the Opioid Treatment Program. Maintaining this group in opioid treatment services is critical not only in terms of lowering the likelihood of injection drug use, but also to maintain the connection these patients have to clinic medical and other treatment staff, who can encourage adherence to ART or link these individuals to HIV treatment and services. Decisions on take-home dosing for patients with HIV were reviewed on a case-by-case basis that balanced patients’ vulnerability to COVID-19 with risks posed by providing potentially unstable patients with large doses of methadone. These discussions revolved around key risk factors, heavily emphasizing drug poisoning risks (e.g., recent drug poisoning events; documented drug impairment incidents). During the COVID-19 outbreak, standard tools for safety monitoring are suspended, namely drug testing is considered “non-essential”, and breathalyzing is an aerosolizing activity that increases the risk of contagion. The guiding principle for decision making is safety of the patients and public, both in terms of infectious disease risk, as well as from a medication diversion standpoint. We continue to explore medication diversion prevention; at the time of this writing, the clinic is implementing a pilot of a smartphone app which will allow video-directly observed therapy [28]. Impact on Opioid Treatment Program Service Delivery While the impact of the COVID-19 on Opioid Treatment Programs and their patients cannot yet be fully appreciated, we describe initial patient flow variables before and after the onset of the pandemic. Two time periods spanning Monday–Saturday (excluding Sunday due to clinic closure) were compared: (1) “Before COVID-19”; February 24–29; and (2) “After COVID-19”, March 30–April 4. The percentage of on-site visits given that day’s census was calculated for each day of the time period. Before COVID-19, an average of 61.9% of patients were on site for dosing; this dropped to 31.1%, representing a 49.2% decrease. Of note, the Opioid Treatment Program maintained the same level of admissions (i.e. new patients initiating treatment) as pre-COVID-19. Our initial effort encapsulates lessons learned from one Opioid Treatment Program when rapid implementation of new policies takes place in the face of extenuating circumstances. Namely, despite decades of mandates requiring supervised methadone dosing visits, policies were rapidly changed during a national crisis in order to ensure uninterrupted access to methadone while balancing efforts to mitigate COVID-19 risk. Our experience highlights that organization-level decisions can be made quickly, resulting in both the reduction in the number of persons on site by almost half, as well as a slight increase in the overall census. An unexpected bright spot of COVID-19 is the opportunity to formally evaluate a set of forcibly changed standard practices that have been called out for reform [29]. The effects of providing extended take-homes is unknown, and future research will be needed to study the effects of these changes on methadone-implicated poisonings, mortality, treatment retention, and HIV-risk behaviors and outcomes. As the pandemic evolves, we may find more people in need of opioid treatment due to reductions in drug supply, economic downturn, or other unpredictable eventualities. Increases in Opioid Treatment Program censuses, as was the case for Evergreen Treatment Services in the past month, will also bring more opportunities for these programs to provide HIV screening, testing, and linkage to treatment, a vital role that this setting can serve for opioid users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Notes from the Field: HIV Diagnoses Among Persons Who Inject Drugs — Northeastern Massachusetts, 2015–2018

          From 2000 to 2014, the number of annual diagnoses of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in Massachusetts declined 47% ( 1 ). In August 2016, however, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) received reports of five new HIV cases among persons who inject drugs from a single community health center in the City of Lawrence ( 2 ). On average, less than one case per month among persons who inject drugs had been reported in Lawrence during 2014–2015 from all providers. Surveillance identified additional cases of HIV infection among such persons linked to Lawrence and Lowell, in northeastern Massachusetts, during 2016–2017. In 2018, MDPH and CDC conducted an investigation to characterize the outbreak and recommend control measures. Investigators reviewed surveillance data and HIV-1 polymerase (pol) gene nucleotide sequences derived from drug resistance testing and interviewed persons with HIV infection in northeastern Massachusetts. Cases were defined as diagnoses of HIV infection in northeastern Massachusetts during January 2015–May 2018 in 1) a person who injects drugs who received medical care, experienced homelessness, resided, or injected drugs in Lawrence or Lowell; 2) a person who was epidemiologically linked as an injecting or sex partner of a person with HIV infection connected to Lawrence or Lowell; or 3) a person with an HIV-1 pol nucleotide sequence molecularly linked at a genetic distance of ≤1.5% (as determined by pairwise sequence analysis) to that of another person in the investigation who was connected to Lawrence or Lowell. Qualitative interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of 34 persons who inject drugs to assess risk factors for HIV infection and with 19 clinicians and other stakeholders in Lawrence and Lowell to identify available medical and social services. As of June 30, 2018, a total of 129 persons meeting the case definition were identified; 74 (57%) were male, 94 (73%) were aged 20–39 years at diagnosis, 87 (67%) were non-Hispanic white, and 38 (29%) were Hispanic. Most (114; 88%) reported a history of injection drug use (Figure), including four (3%) who also reported male-to-male sexual contact; 116 (90%) had laboratory evidence of past or current hepatitis C virus infection. Median CD4+ cell count at diagnosis was 550 cells/μL (range = 1–1,470), suggestive of a number of recent infections ( 3 ). Molecular analysis aided case identification: 28 (22%) cases had epidemiologic links only; 69 (53%) had both epidemiologic and molecular links; and 32 (25%) had molecular links only. Four clusters of ≥5 cases were identified using molecular links; two of these clusters accounted for 78 (60%) cases. FIGURE Human immunodeficiency virus diagnoses linked to Lawrence and Lowell, Massachusetts, January 2015–May 2018 The figure is a histogram showing human immunodeficiency virus diagnoses linked to Lawrence and Lowell, Massachusetts, during January 2015 through May 2018. In qualitative interviews, the 34 persons who inject drugs variously identified opioids alone, stimulants (i.e., cocaine and methamphetamine) alone, or both opioids and stimulants as their drugs of choice. Sharing syringes and other equipment, experiencing homelessness, being incarcerated, or exchanging sex for drugs during the previous year also were reported. Stakeholders reported that fentanyl had replaced heroin in local communities, was cheaper in Lawrence than in other cities in the region, and had increased injection frequency. The reported increased frequency of fentanyl injection might have increased transmission in Lawrence and Lowell. Stakeholders also reported that frequent homelessness and incarceration among injection drug users undermined HIV treatment success because of interrupted treatment, missed appointments, and having multiple care providers. An additional challenge noted was syringe services program (SSP) accessibility. Lowell had a privately funded SSP with limited days and hours of operation; since 2017, Lawrence had a state-funded SSP with daily availability, but no weekend or evening hours. Opioid overdose deaths have increased rapidly in Lawrence and Lowell since 2013 ( 4 ), with postmortem fentanyl detection increasing statewide ( 5 ). The presence of multiple molecular clusters and unlinked infections suggests multiple introductions of HIV among persons who inject drugs as well as recent and rapid transmission in the context of some longstanding HIV infections. Lawrence and Lowell approved state-funded SSPs in 2016 and 2018, respectively. MDPH has since deployed additional field staff members to link persons with HIV infection to care and to provide partner services. MDPH and local partners are expanding services that address social instability attributable to homelessness and incarceration and increase knowledge about safer injection practices among persons who inject drugs. MDPH will continue HIV testing, field investigation, and molecular cluster detection and response statewide.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            HIV treatment outcomes among HIV-infected, opioid-dependent patients receiving buprenorphine/naloxone treatment within HIV clinical care settings: results from a multisite study.

            Having opioid dependence and HIV infection are associated with poor HIV-related treatment outcomes. HIV-infected, opioid-dependent subjects (N = 295) recruited from 10 clinical sites initiated buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NX) and were assessed at baseline and quarterly for 12 months. Primary outcomes included receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART), HIV-1 RNA suppression, and mean changes in CD4 lymphocyte count. Analyses were stratified for the 119 subjects not on ART at baseline. Generalized estimating equations were deployed to examine time-dependent correlates for each outcome. At baseline, subjects on ART (N = 176) were more likely than those not on ART (N = 119) to be older, heterosexual, have lower alcohol addiction severity scores, and lower HIV-1 RNA levels; they were less likely to be homeless and report sexual risk behaviors. Subjects initiating BUP/NX (N = 295) were significantly more likely to initiate or remain on ART and improve CD4 counts over time compared with baseline; however, these improvements were not significantly improved by longer retention on BUP/NX. Retention on BUP/NX for three or more quarters was, however, significantly associated with increased likelihood of initiating ART (β = 1.34 [1.18, 1.53]) and achieve viral suppression (β = 1.25 [1.10, 1.42]) for the 64 of 119 (54%) subjects not on ART at baseline compared with the 55 subjects not retained on BUP/NX. In longitudinal analyses, being on ART was positively associated with increasing time of observation from baseline and higher mental health quality of life scores (β = 1.25 [1.06, 1.46]) and negatively associated with being homo- or bisexual (β = 0.55 [0.35, 0.97]), homeless (β = 0.58 [0.34, 0.98]), and increasing levels of alcohol addiction severity (β = 0.17 [0.03, 0.88]). The strongest correlate of achieving viral suppression was being on ART (β = 10.27 [5.79, 18.23]). Female gender (β = 1.91 [1.07, 3.41]), Hispanic ethnicity (β = 2.82 [1.44, 5.49]), and increased general health quality of life (β = 1.02 [1.00,1.04]) were also independently correlated with viral suppression. Improvements in CD4 lymphocyte count were significantly associated with being on ART and increased over time. Initiating BUP/NX in HIV clinical care settings is feasible and correlated with initiation of ART and improved CD4 lymphocyte counts. Longer retention on BPN/NX was not associated with improved prescription of ART, viral suppression, or CD4 lymphocyte counts for the overall sample in which the majority was already prescribed ART at baseline. Among those retained on BUP/NX, HIV treatment outcomes did not worsen and were sustained. Increasing time on BUP/NX, however, was especially important for improving HIV treatment outcomes for those not on ART at baseline, the group at highest risk for clinical deterioration. Retaining subjects on BUP/NX is an important goal for sustaining HIV treatment outcomes for those on ART and improving them for those who are not. Comorbid substance use disorders (especially alcohol), mental health problems, and quality-of-life indicators independently contributed to HIV treatment outcomes among HIV-infected persons with opioid dependence, suggesting the need for multidisciplinary treatment strategies for this population.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Outbreak of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection Among Heterosexual Persons Who Are Living Homeless and Inject Drugs — Seattle, Washington, 2018

              Although diagnoses of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection among persons who inject drugs in the United States are declining, an HIV outbreak among such persons in rural Indiana demonstrated that population’s vulnerability to HIV infection ( 1 ). In August 2018, Public Health–Seattle and King County (PHSKC) identified a cluster of cases of HIV infection among persons living homeless, most of whom injected drugs. Investigation identified 14 related cases diagnosed from February to mid-November 2018 among women who inject drugs and men who have sex with women (MSW) who inject drugs and their sex partners. All 14 persons were living homeless in an approximately 3–square-mile area and were part of a cluster of 23 cases diagnosed since 2008. Twenty-seven cases of HIV infection were diagnosed among women and MSW who inject drugs in King County during January 1–November 15, 2018, a 286% increase over the seven cases diagnosed in 2017. PHSKC has alerted medical and social service providers and the public about the outbreak, expanded HIV testing among persons who inject drugs or who are living homeless, and is working to increase the availability of clinical and prevention services in the geographic area of the outbreak. This outbreak highlights the vulnerability of persons who inject drugs, particularly those who also are living homeless, to outbreaks of HIV infection, even in areas with high levels of viral suppression and large syringe services programs (SSPs). Investigation and Findings Cluster cases met one or more of the following criteria: 1) HIV infection diagnosis in a woman or MSW in 2018, with partner services data indicating sex or sharing injection-drug equipment with a person in a previously identified cluster case; 2) HIV infection diagnosis in 2018 in a woman or MSW living homeless in the outbreak area; 3) molecular analysis indicating HIV infection with a strain related to those identified among persons meeting either of the first two criteria (HIV-TRACE genetic distance ≤1.5%) ( 2 ). Cases were excluded if molecular analysis indicated infection with an HIV strain unrelated to the cluster. In July 2018, an MSW living homeless in north Seattle tested positive for acute HIV infection (HIV Ag/Ab positive, Geenius HIV negative, HIV RNA positive) at an emergency department (ED) after being evaluated with fever (patient 6) (Table 1). He did not report injecting drugs, but had paid a woman for sex. That woman was living homeless in the area, injected heroin, and had tested HIV-positive in June (patient 5). A social media search performed by a public health disease intervention specialist linked her to a man who injected drugs and was living homeless who had tested HIV-positive in July (patient 7). PHSKC was aware of three other recently diagnosed cases of HIV infection among women who inject drugs and were living homeless in north Seattle (patients 1, 2, and 3); none of these women had known epidemiologic links to other recently diagnosed cases. Subsequent molecular analyses conducted with HIV TRACE ( 2 ), a program that uses HIV genotypes to identify cases with related HIV strains based on HIV genetic sequence data, confirmed that four of the recently diagnosed cases in women and MSW who inject drugs, including the three without known epidemiologic links to other 2018 diagnoses, were infected with related HIV strains (patients 1–4). Molecular analysis also linked the seven recently diagnosed cases to eight cases diagnosed during 2008–2017 (patients 15–21 and 23) and two cases identified in September 2018 (patients 11 and 12). As of November 20, 2018, the cluster included 23 cases (Figure) (Table 2), 14 of which were diagnosed in 2018, demonstrating that transmission was at least intermittently ongoing since 2008, with evidence suggesting an acceleration in transmission during 2017–2018. TABLE 1 Clinical and epidemiologic characteristics of a cluster of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) cases among 23 persons living homeless who inject drugs and their sex partners and molecularly linked cases — Seattle, Washington, 2008–2018 Patient no. Diagnosis
quarter/yr Gender HIV risk factor and substance use Reported exchange of sex Reason for HIV testing Date last HIV test* Links to other cases identified through investigation Related HIV strain Cluster criteria† Care status§ HIV infection diagnosed 2018 1 Q1, 2018 F Heroin/meth (IDU) No Regular testing Q4, 2013 None Yes 2,3 Suppressed 2 Q1, 2018 F Heroin/meth (IDU uncertain) No STD symptoms Unknown Sex Yes 1,2,3 In care, not suppressed 3 Q1, 2018 F Heroin/meth (IDU) No Acute HIV symptoms Never tested None Yes 2,3 Suppressed 4 Q2, 2018 M Heroin (IDU); meth (smoke) No Hospitalized Q1, 2017 IDU Yes 1,2,3 In care, not suppressed 5 Q2, 2018 F Heroin (IDU); meth (smoke) Yes Court-ordered testing Unknown Sex; IDU ND 1,2 Out of care 6¶ Q3, 2018 M NIR: presumed heterosexual; heroin, meth (non-IDU) Yes Acute HIV symptoms Unknown Sex ND 1,2 In care, not suppressed 7 Q3, 2018 M Heroin/meth (IDU) No Surveillance outreach testing Unknown Social media; IDU ND 1,2 Out of care 8 Q3, 2018 F Heroin (IDU); meth (smoke) Yes Outreach Q4, 2017 None ND 2 Out of care 9 Q3, 2018 F Heroin (IDU); meth (smoke) Yes Outreach Q4, 2016 None ND 2 Suppressed 10 Q3, 2018 F Unknown drugs (IDU) Yes Acute HIV symptoms Unknown No interview ND 2 Out of care 11 Q3, 2018 F Meth (IDU) Yes ED screening Q1, 2018 No interview Yes 2,3 In care, not suppressed 12 Q3, 2018 F Heterosexual Yes Outreach Q3, 2018 Sex Yes 2,3 Suppressed 13 Q4, 2018 F Heroin (IDU); meth (unknown route) Yes Mobile clinic Q4, 2013 No interview ND 2 In care, not suppressed 14 Q4, 2018 F Meth (IDU) Yes Outreach Q1, 2018 No interview ND 2 Out of care HIV infection diagnosed 2008–2017 15 Q1, 2008 F Heterosexual Unknown Unknown Q1, 2006 No interview Yes 3 Deceased 16 Q2, 2008 M Unknown drugs (IDU) Unknown Unknown Unknown None Yes 3 Deceased 17 Q3, 2011 M NIR; Unknown drug use Unknown Unknown 2009 Sex Yes 1,3 Out of care 18 Q3, 2014 F NIR; history of IDU (none recently) No Acute HIV symptoms 2000 None Yes 3 In care, not suppressed 19 Q4, 2016 F Heroin (IDU); crack cocaine Yes HIV-unrelated infection Q4, 2008 None Yes 3 Suppressed 20 Q4, 2016 M Heroin/meth (IDU) Unknown Unknown 2014 No interview Yes 3 Suppressed 21 Q4, 2016 F Unknown drugs (IDU) Unknown Unknown Unknown Sex Yes 1,3 Suppressed 22 Q2, 2017 M Heterosexual; unknown drug use Unknown Unknown Unknown Sex ND 1 Out of care 23 Q4, 2017 F Heroin (IDU); meth (unknown route) No Regular testing Unknown None Yes 3 Suppressed Abbreviations: ED = emergency department; F = female; IDU = injection drug use; M = male; Meth = methamphetamine; MSW = men who have sex with women; ND = no data available; NIR = no identified risk; Q = quarter. * Most recent test based on patient self-report or verified result from medical record. Quarter not specified when unknown. † Cluster criteria: 1 = HIV infection diagnosis in a woman or MSW in 2018, with partner services data indicating sex or sharing injection-drug equipment with a previously identified cluster case; 2 = HIV infection diagnosis in 2018 in a woman or MSW living homeless in the outbreak area; 3 = molecular analysis indicating HIV infection with a strain related to those identified among persons meeting either of the first two criteria (HIV-TRACE genetic distance ≤1.5%). Cases were excluded if molecular analysis indicated infection with an HIV strain unrelated to the cluster. § Suppression ( 7 million syringes to persons who inject drugs in 2017; 79% of persons who inject drugs report using SSPs, and syringe sharing among persons who inject drugs has declined over time ( 5 ). Only 1%–3% of the approximately 21,000 women and MSW who inject drugs in the county have HIV infection, and 80% of those with a diagnosis are virally suppressed ( 4 ). Despite these successes, the current outbreak, similar to a recent outbreak in Massachusetts, demonstrates that vulnerability to outbreaks of HIV infection among persons who inject drugs is widespread in the United States ( 6 ). The outbreak described here is part of a larger increase in HIV infection among heterosexual persons who inject drugs that is ongoing in King County. During 2018, the county experienced a nearly threefold increase in new HIV infections among women and MSW who inject drugs. Several factors might contribute to King County’s vulnerability. First, although access to HIV care and prevention in the county is generally good, this outbreak was concentrated in an area where syringe and clinical services for persons who inject drugs are limited, highlighting the need to expand access. Second, like much of the United States, King County faces growing epidemics of opioid overdose and homelessness. From 2007 to 2018, the number of heroin overdose deaths in the county increased 264% ( 7 ), and from 2007 to 2017, the number of country residents living homeless increased 47% ( 8 ). Among SSP users surveyed in 2017, 43% were living homeless, and an additional 26% were unstably housed, a 19% increase from 2015 ( 4 ). Thus, the area has a rapidly growing population who inject drugs and are living homeless, a group for whom accessing services is particularly difficult. These factors have resulted in a new population-level susceptibility to HIV transmission. The King County outbreak also illustrates both the value and limitations of disease intervention specialist investigations and molecular HIV analyses. Disease intervention specialists initially identified the outbreak, and PHSKC and the Washington State Department of Health used molecular analyses to recognize related cases not identified through disease investigation and to confirm relationships suggested by epidemiologic linkages. Retrospective review of the molecular data demonstrated that 10 related cases (eight with genetic sequence data available) were diagnosed from December 2016 to August 2018, when the cluster was first identified. Had the molecular data been available and analyzed more quickly, it might have been possible to respond earlier, possibly averting some cases. CDC recently initiated a national effort to expand the use of molecular HIV analyses to identify growing clusters of cases ( 9 ). The experience described here suggests how such analyses might be useful if they were available and analyzed in real time with appropriate thresholds for action. Finally, the King County outbreak demonstrates how difficult it is to engage the most socially marginalized persons with medical care. As of mid-November 2018, seven of the 21 living persons in the cluster were not receiving HIV care. Disease intervention specialists are actively seeking these persons to link them to a clinic that provides walk-in HIV medical care ( 10 ). Persons who inject drugs remain vulnerable to outbreaks of HIV infection, even in cities with large HIV prevention programs and shrinking HIV epidemics. A new U.S. Department of Health and Human Services initiative, Ending the HIV Epidemic: A Plan for America,* defines molecular HIV surveillance and associated responses as one of four central pillars for ending the epidemic. The outbreak described in this report illustrates the benefits of integrating disease investigations and molecular HIV analyses to more rapidly and efficiently identify and respond to localized outbreaks of HIV infection and should prompt health departments in other jurisdictions to investigate whether similar outbreaks are ongoing in their areas. Summary What is already known about this topic? Although diagnoses of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection among persons who inject drugs in the United States are declining, an HIV outbreak among such persons in rural Indiana demonstrated that population’s vulnerability to HIV infection. What is added by this report? In 2018, disease investigation and molecular HIV surveillance in Seattle, Washington, identified 14 related HIV diagnoses among heterosexuals who were living homeless, most of whom injected drugs. From 2017 to mid-November 2018, the number of HIV diagnoses among heterosexuals in King County, Washington, who inject drugs increased 286%. What are the implications for public health practice? Persons who inject drugs, particularly those living homeless, remain vulnerable to outbreaks of HIV infection, even in cities with large HIV prevention programs and shrinking HIV epidemics.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                peavy@evergreentx.org
                Journal
                AIDS Behav
                AIDS Behav
                AIDS and Behavior
                Springer US (New York )
                1090-7165
                1573-3254
                28 April 2020
                : 1-4
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Evergreen Treatment Services, Seattle, WA USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Department of Medicine, , University of Washington School of Medicine, ; Seattle, WA USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                [4 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Alcohol & Drug Abuse Institute, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                [5 ]Washington State Health Care Authority, Olympia, WA USA
                Article
                2887
                10.1007/s10461-020-02887-1
                7186943
                32347404
                a3aea2db-c130-449e-8fad-eb0232ed9b10
                © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.

                History
                Categories
                Notes From The Field

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                Infectious disease & Microbiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article