ArticleHarm reduction journal2026
"We're here, and we're non-judgmental, we're here to save lives": stressors and fulfillment among overdose response hotline operators in Canada.
Article in Harm reduction journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe toxic drug supply and overdose epidemic in North America has led to deaths, reduced quality of life, and emotional burdens, especially for harm reduction workers who experience stress from grief and trauma. This study aims to evaluate the benefits and harms of working in overdose prevention hotlines and to identify strategies to reduce stress and trauma for lived-experience operators in these settings.
methodsWe conducted a sequential mixed-methods study comprising 11 qualitative interviews and a survey with 15 operators and volunteers with Canada's National Overdose Response Service (NORS). The study explored operator challenges, compassion fatigue, and quality of life with previously validated quality of life surveys (ProQOL), while also assessing the perceived effectiveness of the hotline in reducing overdose deaths, mental health impacts, and emergency medical service call-outs.
resultsFrom our qualitative interviews, 3 major themes emerged including (1) The duality of remote overdose response work including: tension between flexibility, accessibility, and supportive team dynamics, with ethical challenges, lack of physical presence, and complex client interactions. (2) Emotional burden and stress in a remote context and: (3) Meaning, purpose, and peer connection as drivers of fulfilment. Overall, most participants ranked their burnout levels as low (13/15 (86.6%)), compassion satisfaction as high (13/15 (86.6%)), and secondary traumatic stress as low (14/15 (93.3%)).
conclusionThis study reveals that work with overdose prevention hotlines is both rewarding and sustainable, with operators experiencing low burnout, low secondary traumatic stress, and high compassion satisfaction. The flexibility, strong team support, and inclusive approach of NORS make remote harm reduction a viable model for aiding marginalized individuals effectively in the overdose crisis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.