Faculty Bibliography

Structural racism is increasingly recognized as a key driver of health inequities and other adverse outcomes. This paper focuses on structural racism as an "upstream" institutionalized process, how it creates health inequities and how structural racism persists in spite of generations of efforts to end it. So far, "downstream" efforts to reduce these health inequities have had little success in eliminating them. Here, we attempt to increase public health awareness of structural racism and its institutionalization and sociopolitical supports so that research and action can address them. This paper presents both a theoretic and an analytic approach to how structural racism contributes to disproportionate rates of HIV/AIDS and related diseases among oppressed populations. We first discuss differences in disease and health outcomes among people who use drugs (PWUD) and other groups at risk for HIV from different racial and ethnic populations. The paper then briefly analyzes the history of racism; how racial oppression, class, gender and other intersectional divisions interact to create health inequities; and how structural racism is institutionalized in ways that contribute to disease disparities among people who use drugs and other people. It examines the processes, institutions and other structures that reinforce structural racism, and how these, combined with processes that normalize racism, serve as barriers to efforts to counter and dismantle the structural racism that Black, indigenous and Latinx people have confronted for centuries. Finally, we discuss the implications of this analysis for public health research and action to undo racism and to enhance the health of populations who have suffered lifetimes of racial/ethnic oppression, with a focus on HIV/AIDS outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Substance-related interactions with the criminal justice system are a potential touchpoint to identify people at risk for firearm violence. We used an agent-based model to simulate the change in firearm violence after disqualifying people from owning a firearm given prior alcohol- and drug-related misdemeanors. METHODS:We created a population of 800,000 agents reflecting a 15% sample of the adult New York City population. RESULTS:Disqualification from purchasing firearms for 5 years after an alcohol-related misdemeanor conviction reduced population-level rates of firearm homicide by 1.0% [95% CI 0.4-1.6%] and suicide by 3.0% [95% CI 1.9-4.0%]. Disqualification based on a drug-related misdemeanor conviction reduced homicide by 1.6% [95% CI 1.1-2.2%] and suicide by 4.6% [95% CI 3.4-5.8%]. Reductions were generally 2 to 8 times larger for agents meeting the disqualification criteria. CONCLUSIONS:Denying firearm access based on a history of drug and alcohol misdemeanors may reduce firearm violence among the high-risk group. Enactment of substance use-related firearms denial criteria needs to be balanced against concerns about introducing new sources of disenfranchisement among already vulnerable populations.

BACKGROUND:Until recently, few carceral facilities offered medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Although more facilities are adopting MOUD, much remains to be learned about addressing implementation challenges related to expansion of MOUD in carceral settings and linkage to care upon re-entry. This is particularly important in jails, where individuals cycle rapidly in and out of these facilities, especially in jurisdictions beginning to implement bail reform laws (i.e., laws that remove the requirement to pay bail for most individuals). Increasing access to MOUD in these settings is a key unexplored challenge. METHODS:In this qualitative study, we interviewed staff from county jails across New Jersey, a state that has implemented state-wide efforts to increase capacity for MOUD treatment in jails. We analyzed themes related to current practices used to engage individuals in MOUD while in jail and upon re-entry; major challenges to delivering MOUD and re-entry services, particularly under bail reform conditions; and innovative strategies to facilitate delivery of these services. RESULTS:Jail staff from 11 New Jersey county jails participated in a baseline survey and an in-depth qualitative interview from January-September 2020. Responses revealed that practices for delivering MOUD varied substantially across jails. Primary challenges included jails' limited resources and highly regulated operations, the chaotic nature of short jail stays, and concerns regarding limited MOUD and resources in the community. Still, jail staff identified multiple facilitators and creative solutions for delivering MOUD in the face of these obstacles, including opportunities brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS:Despite challenges to the delivery of MOUD, states can make concerted and sustained efforts to support opioid addiction treatment in jails. Increased use of evidence-based clinical guidelines, greater investment in resources, and increased partnerships with health and social service providers can greatly improve reach of treatment and save lives.

Opioid-related overdose deaths have increased since 2010 in the U.S., but information on trends in opioid use disorder (OUD) prevalence is limited due to unreliable data. Multiplier methods are a classical epidemiological technique to estimate prevalence when direct estimation is infeasible or unreliable. We used two different multiplier approaches to estimate OUD prevalence from 2010 to 2019. First, we estimated OUD in National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), and based on existing capture-recapture studies, multiplied prevalence by 4.5x. Second, we estimated the probability of drug poisoning death among people with OUD (Meta-analysis indicates 0.52/100,000), and divided the number of drug poisoning deaths in the US by this probability. Estimates were weighted to account for increase in drug-related mortality in recent years due to fentanyl. Estimated OUD prevalence was lowest when estimated in NSDUH with no multiplier, and highest when estimated from vital statistics data without adjustment. Consistent findings emerged with two methods: NSDUH data with multiplier correction, and vital statistics data with multiplier and adjustment. From these two methods, OUD prevalence increased from 2010 to 2014; then stabilized and slightly declined annually (survey data with multiplier, highest prevalence of 4.0% in 2015; death data with a multiplier and correction, highest prevalence of 2.35% in 2016). The number of US adolescent and adult individuals with OUD in 2019 was estimated between 6.7-7.6 million. When multipliers and corrections are used, OUD may have stabilized or slightly declined after 2015. Nevertheless, it remains highly prevalent, affecting 6-7 million US adolescents and adults.

Adolescent internalizing symptoms have increased since 2010, while adequate sleep has declined for several decades. It remains unclear how self-reported sleep attainment has impacted internalizing symptoms trends. Using 1991-2019 MTF data (N~390,000), we estimate age-period-cohort effects in adolescent internalizing symptoms (loneliness, self-esteem, self-derogation, depressive affect) and the association with yearly prevalence of a survey-assessed, self-reported measure of ≥ 7 hours sleep attainment. We focus our main analysis on loneliness and use median odds ratios (MORs), measures of variance in loneliness associated with period differences. We observed limited signals for cohort effects and modeled only period effects. Loneliness increased by 0.83% per year; adolescents in 2019 had 0.68 (95% CI: 0.49, 0.87) increased log-odds of loneliness compared with the mean, consistent by race/ethnicity and parental education. Girls experienced steeper increases than boys (p<0.0001). The period effect MOR for loneliness was 1.16 (variance=0.09; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.17) before adjusting for self-reported frequency of ≥ 7 hours sleep vs. 1.07 (variance=0.02; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.03) after adjusting. Adolescents across cohorts are experiencing worsening internalizing symptoms. Self-reported frequency of <7 hours sleep partially explains increases in loneliness, indicating the need for feasibility trials to study the effect of increasing sleep attainment on internalizing symptoms.

OBJECTIVE:Despite their effectiveness in preventing the transmission of HIV among people who inject drugs (PWID), syringe services programs (SSPs) in many settings are hampered by social and political opposition. We aimed to estimate the impact of closure and temporary interruption of SSP on the HIV epidemic in a rural US setting. METHODS:Using an agent-based model calibrated to observed surveillance data, we simulated HIV risk behaviors and transmission in adult populations who inject and do not inject drugs in Scott County, Indiana. We projected HIV incidence and prevalence between 2020-2025 for scenarios with permanent closure, delayed closure (one additional renewal for 24 months before closure), and temporary closure (lasting 12 months) of an SSP in comparison to persistent SSP operation. RESULTS:With sustained SSP operation, we projected an incidence rate of 0.15 per 100 person-years among the overall population [95% simulation interval: 0.06-0.28]. Permanently closing the SSP would cause an average of 58.4% increase in the overall incidence rate during 2021-2025, resulting in a higher prevalence of 60.8% [50.9%-70.6%] (18.7% increase) among PWID by 2025. A delayed closure would increase the incidence rate by 38.9%. A temporary closure would cause 12 (35.3%) more infections during 2020-2021. CONCLUSIONS:Our analysis suggests that temporary interruption and permanent closure of existing SSPs operating in rural US may lead to "rebound" HIV outbreaks among PWID. To reach and sustain HIV epidemic control, it will be necessary to maintain existing and implement new SSPs in combination with other prevention interventions.

BACKGROUND:Substance use disorders (SUD) elevate the risk for COVID-19 hospitalization, but studies are inconsistent on the relationship of SUD to COVID-19 mortality. METHODS:Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients treated in 2019 and evaluated in 2020 for COVID-19 (n=5,556,315), of whom 62,303 (1.1%) tested positive for COVID-19 (COVID-19+). Outcomes were COVID-19+ by 11/01/20, hospitalization, ICU admission, or death within 60 days of a positive test. Main predictors were any ICD-10-CM SUDs, with substance-specific SUDs (cannabis, cocaine, opioid, stimulant, sedative) explored individually. Logistic regression produced unadjusted and covariate-adjusted odds ratios (OR; aOR). RESULTS:Among COVID-19+ patients, 19.25% were hospitalized, 7.71% admitted to ICU, and 5.84% died. In unadjusted models, any SUD and all substance-specific SUDs except cannabis use disorder were associated with COVID-19+(ORs=1.06-1.85); adjusted models produced similar results. Any SUD and all substance-specific SUDs were associated with hospitalization (aORs: 1.24-1.91). Any SUD, cocaine and opioid disorder were associated with ICU admission in unadjusted but not adjusted models. Any SUD, cannabis, cocaine, and stimulant disorders were inversely associated with mortality in unadjusted models (OR=0.27-0.46). After adjustment, associations with mortality were no longer significant. In ad hoc analyses, adjusted odds of mortality were lower among the 49.9% of COVID-19+ patients with SUD who had SUD treatment in 2019, but not among those without such treatment. CONCLUSIONS:In VHA patients, SUDs are associated with COVID-19 hospitalization but not COVID-19 mortality. SUD treatment may provide closer monitoring of care, ensuring that these patients received needed medical attention, enabling them to ultimately survive serious illness.

BACKGROUND:Drug overdose rates in the United States have been steadily increasing, particularly in rural areas. The COVID-19 pandemic and associated mitigation strategies may have increased overdose risk for people who use drugs by impacting social, community, and structural factors. METHODS:The study included a quantitative survey focused on COVID-19 administered to 50 people who use drugs and semi-structured qualitative interviews with 17 people who use drugs, 12 of whom also participated in the quantitative survey. Descriptive statistics were run for the quantitative data. Qualitative coding was line-by-line then grouped thematically. Quantitative and qualitative data were integrated during analysis. RESULTS:Findings demonstrate how COVID-19 disruptions at the structural and community level affected outcomes related to mental health and drug use at the individual level. Themes that emerged from the qualitative interviews were (1) lack of employment opportunities, (2) food and housing insecurity, (3) community stigma impacting health service use, (4) mental health strains, and (5) drug market disruptions. Structural and community changes increased anxiety, depression, and loneliness on the individual level, as well as changes in drug use patterns, all of which are likely to increase overdose risk. CONCLUSION:The COVID-19 pandemic, and mitigation strategies aimed at curbing infection, disrupted communities and lives of people who use drugs. These disruptions altered individual drug use and mental health outcomes, which could increase risk for overdose. We recommend addressing structural and community factors, including developing multi-level interventions, to combat overdose. Trial registration Clinicaltrails.gov: NCT04427202. Registered June 11, 2020: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04427202?term=pho+mai&draw=2&rank=3.