Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

A qualitative study exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on People Who Inject Drugs (PWID) and drug service provision in the UK: PWID and service provider perspectives

View ORCID ProfileTom May, View ORCID ProfileJo Dawes, View ORCID ProfileDaisy Fancourt, View ORCID ProfileAlexandra Burton
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.24.22269530
Tom May
1Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology & Health Care, University College London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Tom May
  • For correspondence: t.may@ucl.ac.uk
Jo Dawes
2UCL Collaborative Centre for Inclusion Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jo Dawes
Daisy Fancourt
1Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology & Health Care, University College London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Daisy Fancourt
Alexandra Burton
1Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology & Health Care, University College London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Alexandra Burton
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background People Who Inject Drugs (PWID) are subject to distinct socio-structural inequalities that can expose them to high risks of COVID-19 transmission and related health and social complications. In response to COVID-19 mitigation strategies, these vulnerabilities are being experienced in the context of adapted drug treatment service provision, including reduced in-person support and increased regulatory flexibility in opioid substitution therapy (OST) guidelines. This study aimed to explore the longer-term impact of the pandemic on the health and wellbeing of PWID in the UK, including provider and client experiences of treatment changes.

Methods Interviews were conducted with 19 PWID and 17 drug treatment providers between May – September 2021, recruited from third-sector drug services in the UK. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results Most participants expressed ongoing fears of COVID-19 transmission, although socio-structural inequalities limited the contexts in which physical distancing could be practised. In addition, virus mitigation strategies altered the risk environment for PWID, resulting in ongoing physical (e.g. changing drug use patterns, including transitions to crack cocaine, benzodiazepine and pregabalin use) and socio-economic harms (e.g. limited opportunities for sex work engagement and income generation). Finally, whilst clients reported some favourable experiences from service adaptations prompted by COVID-19, including increased regulatory flexibility in OST guidelines, there was continued scepticism and caution among providers toward sustaining any treatment changes beyond the pandemic period.

Conclusions Whilst our findings emphasize the importance of accessible harm reduction measures attending to changing indices of drug-related harm during this period, there is a need for additional structural supports to ensure pre-existing disparities and harms impacting PWID are not exacerbated further by the conditions of the pandemic. In addition, any sustained policy and service delivery adaptations prompted by COVID-19 will require further attention if they are to be acceptable to both service users and providers.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

The COVID-19 Social Study was funded by the Nuffield Foundation (WEL/ FR-000022583), but the views expressed here are those of the authors. The study was also supported by the MARCH Mental Health Network funded by the CrossDisciplinary Mental Health Network Plus initiative supported by UK Research and Innovation (ES/S002588/1) and by the Wellcome Trust (221400/Z/20/Z). DF was funded by the Wellcome Trust (205407/Z/16/Z).

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study was reviewed and approved by the University College London Ethics Committee (Project ID 6357/002)

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because they contain information that could compromise the privacy of research participants. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to d.fancourt{at}ucl.ac.uk

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted March 24, 2022.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A qualitative study exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on People Who Inject Drugs (PWID) and drug service provision in the UK: PWID and service provider perspectives
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
A qualitative study exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on People Who Inject Drugs (PWID) and drug service provision in the UK: PWID and service provider perspectives
Tom May, Jo Dawes, Daisy Fancourt, Alexandra Burton
medRxiv 2022.01.24.22269530; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.24.22269530
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
A qualitative study exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on People Who Inject Drugs (PWID) and drug service provision in the UK: PWID and service provider perspectives
Tom May, Jo Dawes, Daisy Fancourt, Alexandra Burton
medRxiv 2022.01.24.22269530; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.24.22269530

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Addiction Medicine
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (271)
  • Allergy and Immunology (559)
  • Anesthesia (135)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1774)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (239)
  • Dermatology (173)
  • Emergency Medicine (316)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (662)
  • Epidemiology (10824)
  • Forensic Medicine (8)
  • Gastroenterology (595)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2962)
  • Geriatric Medicine (289)
  • Health Economics (534)
  • Health Informatics (1935)
  • Health Policy (836)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (746)
  • Hematology (294)
  • HIV/AIDS (634)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (12530)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (696)
  • Medical Education (300)
  • Medical Ethics (89)
  • Nephrology (325)
  • Neurology (2815)
  • Nursing (152)
  • Nutrition (433)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (560)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (600)
  • Oncology (1475)
  • Ophthalmology (444)
  • Orthopedics (172)
  • Otolaryngology (258)
  • Pain Medicine (190)
  • Palliative Medicine (56)
  • Pathology (381)
  • Pediatrics (869)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (368)
  • Primary Care Research (339)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2650)
  • Public and Global Health (5386)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1019)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (598)
  • Respiratory Medicine (727)
  • Rheumatology (330)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (293)
  • Sports Medicine (279)
  • Surgery (328)
  • Toxicology (48)
  • Transplantation (150)
  • Urology (127)