Hundreds of Albertans Call on Jason Kenny to Save Canceled Treatment Program

Call to Maintain Funding for Alberta’s Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment Clinics

The injection room of the iOAT program in Edmonton.  This highly effective program is slated to close in March 2020.

The injection room of the iOAT program in Edmonton. This highly effective program is slated to close in March 2020.

An open letter to the Government of Alberta Honourable Jason Kenney, Premier

2020-09-09 15_30_31-.png

Cc: Honourable Tyler Shandro, Minister of Health, Alberta Honourable Jason Luan, Associate Minister for Mental Health and Addictions David Shepherd, MLA, Opposition Critic for Health Heather Sweet, MLA, Opposition Critic for Mental Health and Addictions Dr. Deena Hinshaw, Chief Medical Officer of Health Honourable Patty Hajdu, Minister of Health, Canada

Dear Premier Kenney,

We, the undersigned are a group of Albertan patients, families, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, social workers, counsellors, peer workers, academics, and concerned citizens of the province. We are writing to express our grave concerns with your government’s decision to discontinue funding for Edmonton and Calgary’s injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) programs after March 2021. Many of us have experience providing iOAT. Some of us and our families have directly benefited from receiving this life-saving treatment. All of us understand the need for iOAT as part of the full spectrum of care for people as they recover from the impacts of opioid use disorders and have been encouraged by the remarkable health and social benefits of this treatment to the people who receive it, to their families, and to the community at large.

While much of the health care system’s attention has turned towards protecting Albertans through the global COVID-19 pandemic, we also recognize that people at risk of severe adverse outcomes from substance use disorders are at the intersection of both the pandemic and the opioid overdose crisis which continues to exact its toll on communities across Canada. Alberta remains one of the hardest hit provinces with close to two people dying daily as a result of accidental opioid poisoning (1) and reports of increasing EMS calls for overdose (2) and the re-emergence of carfentanil in the drug supply3 make us concerned that this crisis has worsened over recent months. At this time more than any before, we must offer all evidence-based treatments to patients. The decision to discontinue funding to iOAT makes this option inaccessible for Albertans who may seek help as the programs are no longer able to accept new patients. Those who are currently benefiting from this treatment will be forced off of it in the coming months and many of these individuals may suffer severe adverse outcomes as a result.

In September 2019, the Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse (CRISM) published National Guidelines on iOAT for Opioid Use Disorder. National experts thoroughly reviewed scientific evidence to develop these guidelines which were subject to expert peer review. The guidelines are clear: iOAT is a necessary treatment option for individuals with severe injection opioid use disorders that have not responded to other treatments (4). Benefits demonstrated through scientific study include reduced illicit opioid use, improved retention in treatment and health care, reduced criminal involvement and incarceration, reduced mortality, and improved overall health and social functioning (5-8). Furthermore, studies in both Europe and Canada have consistently proven that iOAT is cost effective given the significant reductions in criminal activity (9-11) and hospitalizations (12) with their associated costs.

The National Guideline on iOAT for Opioid Use Disorder is also clear that iOAT should not be discontinued while a patient continues to benefit from treatment. Decisions to transition to other treatment options should only be made in collaboration with the patient and based on thorough risk-benefit assessments. Discontinuing funding for the programs removes that opportunity and forces their health care providers to practice against national expert guidance. Patients who have developed trusting relationships with these programs will be disengaged once again and many may not avail themselves of other treatments that have failed them before. These prospects are tragic as patients will be at tremendous risk of destabilization and related harms, including overdose mortality.

The iOAT programs in Edmonton and Calgary are benchmarks of what an intensive, multidisciplinary, and comprehensive addiction treatment program can offer for individuals at critical periods in the trajectory of their recovery. Their patients have access to not only life-saving medication treatment from physicians and nurse practitioners but are also supported in their recovery by peer workers, mental health resources, social workers, nurses, pharmacists, and primary care. Albertans can be proud of what these clinics have accomplished and the positive impacts on their communities. With ongoing support and funding, they could no doubt continue to thrive, support recovery, and offer hope to highly vulnerable patients. Premier, please do not end this evidence-based, cost effective treatment in Alberta. We call on the Government of Alberta to reverse its decision to discontinue funding to the Edmonton and Calgary Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment Clinics and to continue to support this critical treatment option for Albertans.

Sincerely,

2020-09-09 15_04_12-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_04_34-.png
2020-09-09 15_05_07-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_05_26-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_05_44-.png
2020-09-09 15_06_07-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_06_29-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_06_42-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_21_39-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_21_54-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_22_13-.png
2020-09-09 15_22_32-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_22_52-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_23_26-Window.png
2020-09-09 15_23_37-Window.png

References:

1. Health, Government of Alberta, June 2020, Alberta Opioid Response Surveillance Report: Q1 2020. https://www.alberta.ca/opioid-reports.aspx

2. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/drug-users-warned-of-dangers-after-spike-in-opioid-related-ems-calls-in-edmonton-1.5600260

3. https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/spike-in-carfentanil-deaths-opioid-overdoses-in-edmonton-prompts-health-warning

4. Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse (CRISM). National Injectable Opioid Agonist Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder Clinical Guideline. Published September 23, 2019. https://crism.ca/projects/ioat-guideline/

5. Ferri M, Davoli M, Perucci CA. Heroin maintenance for chronic heroin-dependent individuals. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2011(12). 10.1002/14651858.CD003410.pub4

6. Strang J, Groshkova T, Uchtenhagen A, et al. Heroin on trial: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials of diamorphine-prescribing as treatment for refractory heroin addiction. The British Journal of Psychiatry. 2015;207(1):5-14. 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.149195

7. Oviedo-Joekes E, Guh D, Brissette S, et al. Hydromorphone compared with diacetylmorphine for long-term opioid dependence: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016;73(5):447-455. 10.1001/ jamapsychiatry.2016.0109

8. Oviedo-Joekes E, Brissette S, Marsh DC, et al. Diacetylmorphine versus Methadone for the Treatment of Opioid Addiction. New England Journal of Medicine. 2009;361(8):777-786. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0810635

9. Nosyk B, Guh DP, Bansback NJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of diacetylmorphine versus methadone for chronic opioid dependence refractory to treatment. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne. 2012;184(6):E317-328. 10.1503/cmaj.110669

10. Byford S, Barrett B, Metrebian N, et al. Cost-effectiveness of injectable opioid treatment v. oral methadone for chronic heroin addiction. The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science. 2013;203(5):341-349. 10.1192/bjp.bp.112.111583

11. Byford S, Barrett B, Metrebian N, et al. Cost-effectiveness of injectable opioid treatment v. oral methadone for chronic heroin addiction. The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science. 2013;203(5):341-349. 10.1192/bjp.bp.112.111583

12. Bansback N, Guh D, Oviedo-Joekes E, et al. Cost-effectiveness of hydromorphone for severe opioid use disorder: findings from the SALOME randomized clinical trial. Addiction. 2018;113(7):1264-1273. 10.1111/ add.14171

MSTH families strongly object to proposed involuntary care of youths in BC

Leslie.jpg

An open letter to Judy Darcy, British Columbia Minister for Mental Health and Addictions regarding Bill-22-2020 The Mental Health Amendement Act.

Moms Stop the Harm (MSTH), an organization of over 1,300 families in Canada who have all had close experiences with the crisis of overdose and drug-related death, does not support Bill 22, the proposed amendment to the BC Mental Health Act..

The amendment, Bill 22, the involuntary care of youth who present at a medical facility in an overdose state, is counterproductive.  This amendment on involuntary care was drafted with little or no collaboration from stakeholders - families and youth - and will likely have serious negative, unintended consequences for the young people it aims to help.

In the experience of our families, involuntary care does not lead to successful recovery. In fact, we see that it is likely to break a youth’s trust in both the health system and the family - a harmful and devastating outcome that has resulted in the death of a child for a number of families in our community.

Involuntary care will have a destabilizing effect on youth, which may increase their risk of overdose upon release. For many youth who need our help the most, this amendment may have the opposite of its intended outcome. For instance, many marginalized youth who have experienced the health and social systems, including social services, have already lost faith in the state, given that such involvement has often resulted in a negative experience.  Youth may perceive involuntary care as ‘incarceration’ which will exacerbate their lack of faith, thus leading to poor long-term outcomes. 

A further unintended consequence of this amendment is that youth witnessing a friend’s overdose may avoid calling 911 if they know that the possibility exists that they or a friend might be held for up to seven days against their will.  

There are too few health professionals in the province trained and skilled in addiction medicine, especially for youth.  Given that most youth in B.C. have little to no immediate care after overdose, particularly those who live in rural and remote communities, how will they benefit from involuntary care when the infrastructure is simply absent?  Removing them from their home communities, their families, is not the answer.

A further concern is the limited research done in this area; the scant research available does not support the Bill 22 model.

Where services for youth are urgently needed, but absent, is in harm reduction. This was identified by the Advocate for Children and Youth in a report released in November 2018:

The Representative firmly believes that B.C. should be building a comprehensive array of prevention, early intervention, care, treatment and post-treatment services for youth and that harm reduction must be a necessary part of this spectrum of services, especially for youth with significant and severe substance use issues (Advocate for Children and Youth, 2019, p. 1).

Of concern is that Bill 22 has little mention of the impact these changes will have on the family paradigm, nor does it outline the inclusion of families in the care of their loved ones. Families have an important role in supporting children and youth who experience challenges with substance use; families must be supported and involved in the care of their children whenever appropriate.

A further concern is the limited research done in this area, and the research that is available does not support this model.

Rather than implement involuntary approaches to substance use, the Province must instead focus on creating a provincial evidence-based, youth-focused system of care where one presently does not exist, as outlined in the above mentioned report by the Representative for Children and Youth

As the families of Moms Stop the Harm, we strongly object to Bill 22 in its current form, and urge the government to engage in meaningful dialogue with all stakeholders to develop services that actually will help, rather than harm our children.

Leslie McBain, Co-founder

For the British Columbia Members of Moms Stop the Harm, The Board of Directors of MSTH

2020-07-09 11_11_23-Window.png