Co-use of methamphetamine and opioids among people in treatment in Oregon: A qualitative examination of interrelated structural, community, and individual-level factors.

backgroundRates of methamphetamine use and methamphetamine-related deaths have increased steadily in the United States in recent years. Methamphetamine is increasingly present in opioid-related deaths. An initial study of de-identified urine specimens (n = 102) collected at a drug treatment program between 2017 and 2018 indicated that 61% of specimens contained methamphetamine; of the specimens containing methamphetamine, people were, on average, five years younger than those who tested negative for methamphetamine; and non-fentanyl opioids were more than three times as common in methamphetamine positive specimens. The National Drug Early Warning System (NDEWS) Coordinating Center initiated a HotSpot Study to assess whether there was an emerging dynamic in the area, or if enhanced data collection could give insights into the co-use of methamphetamine and opioids.

methodsA qualitative study, grounded in principles of rapid ethnographic assessment and a social science/anthropological framework was conducted and used methodological complementarity to contextualize results from the initial urinalysis study. Targeted sampling was conducted at two treatment sites. Program staff and patients were recruited to participate in focus groups and semi-structured interviews to assess structural, community, and individual-level factors impacting methamphetamine and opioid co-use.

resultsWithin our broader framework of structural, community, and individual-level factors intersecting co-use, our data yielded three sub-themes: 1) the circulation of stigma regarding methamphetamine use was consistently described by both patients and staff and this intersected structural changes in treatment policy and suggested compounded stigma; 2) community-level factors and temporality were important for understanding patterns of methamphetamine use and for further interpreting the initial urinalysis; 3) patient rationales regarding the co-use of methamphetamine and opioids included strategies to mitigate the harms of heroin, as well as to detox or titrate the effects of heroin. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Using an ethnographically-oriented and social science/anthropological approach and methodological complementarity to contextualize the prior urinalysis study demonstrates how behavioral variables cannot be abstracted from larger socio-structural and community contexts which impact people's decision-making process regarding co-use of methamphetamine and opioids. Further, by grounding our analysis in the meaning-centered and experiential narratives of people who use drugs, our research demonstrates the importance of considering the expertise of people who co-use opioids and methamphetamine as central for informing future sustainable program planning to address co-use that also accounts for the interrelationship between structural, community, and individual-level factors.