By Yarelix Estrada, Jeffery Sauer, Leonardo Dominguez, Izza Zaidi, Andrew J. Trinidad, Hannah Helmy, Alex Harocopos

Background: Drug checking is a harm reduction strategy that provides people who use drugs (PWUD) information about the composition of a substance. Drug checking has been identified as a key public health response to the continually evolving overdose crisis.

Methods: The New York City Health Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) partnered with existing syringe programs to launch a drug-checking pilot study. The study offered multiple point-of-care drug-checking technologies including fentanyl test strips (FTS) and Fourier-transformed infrared (FTIR) spectrometry, as well as secondary laboratory testing. Fentanyl positivity in major drug types was assessed for each drug-checking technology.

Results: Between November 2021 and December 2023, a total of N = 397 unique participants and drop-off samples contributed a total of N = 1644 samples for drug checking. The majority of samples were sold as opioids (n = 908), with fewer sold as cocaine (n = 314) and methamphetamine (n = 62). 95.3 % (852/894) of opioid samples produced positive FTS. FTIR and secondary laboratory testing resulted in a similarly high prevalence of fentanyl in opioid samples at 84.7 % (769/908) and 89.3 % (519/581), respectively. We did not observe the unexplained presence of fentanyl in samples sold as cocaine or methamphetamine. Further, we describe instances where discussions between technicians and PWUD provided important context that explained the presence of fentanyl in non-opioid samples.

Conclusion: The majority of opioid samples submitted to DOHMH's drug-checking pilot study contained fentanyl. Comparatively, there was little evidence suggesting fentanyl in samples sold as cocaine and methamphetamine. The drug-checking pilot study's point-of-care service delivery model was effective in providing information to PWUD.

Drug Alcohol Depend 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2025.112578. Epub 2025 Jan 27, 47 p.

By  APRIL M. ZEOLI, ALEXANDER D. McCOURT, and JENNIFER K. PARUK 

We present the rationale behind four types of laws that restrict access to firearms for those who are deemed to be a high risk for future gun violence and two types of laws that implement firearm purchase prohibitions. We also present evidence on the effectiveness of these laws. Broadly, these are laws that restrict access for domestic violence abusers, individuals convicted of misdemeanor violence, and individuals at high risk of violence against themselves or others. We briefly discuss relinquishment of firearms by those who are newly restricted, but we focus mainly on how purchase restrictions are implemented by the federal government and across states. Extant research shows that well-implemented firearm policy that is based on evidence-based risk factors can be effective in reducing firearm injury 

  ANNALS, AAPSS, 704, November 2022  

By Ellicott C. Matthay, Ariana N. Gobaud, Charles C. Branas, Katherine M. Keyes, Brita Roy, Magdalena Cerdá

  BACKGROUND: Firearm violence remains a leading cause of death and injury in the United States. Prior research supports that alcohol exposures, including individual-level alcohol use and alcohol control policies, are modifiable risk factors for firearm violence, yet additional research is needed to support prevention efforts. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review aims to update a prior 2016 systematic review on the links between alcohol exposure and firearm violence to examine whether current studies indicate causal links between alcohol use, alcohol interventions, and firearm violence-related outcomes. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, a comprehensive search of published studies was conducted, replicating the search strategy of the prior review but focusing on studies published since 2015. The review included published studies of humans, conducted in general populations of any age, gender, or racial/ethnic group, that examined the relationship between an alcohol-related exposure and an outcome involving firearm violence or risks for firearm violence. Excluded were small studies restricted to special populations, forensic or other technical studies, non-original research articles such as reviews, and studies that relied solely on descriptive statistics or did not adjust for confounders. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: The review included published studies indexed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. Eligible articles were published on or after January 1, 2015. The latest search was conducted on December 15, 2023. CHARTING METHODS: Using a structured data collection instrument, data were extracted on the characteristics of each study, including the dimension of alcohol exposure, the dimension of firearm violence, study population, study design, statistical analysis, source of funding, main findings, and whether effect measure modification was assessed and, if so, along what dimensions. Two authors independently conducted title/abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction until achieving 95% agreement, with discrepancies resolved through discussion. RESULTS: The search yielded 797 studies. Of these, 754 were excluded and 43 met the final inclusion criteria. Studies addressed a range of alcohol exposures and firearm violence-related outcomes, primarily with crosssectional study designs; 40% considered effect measure modification by any population characteristic. Findings from the 21 studies examining the relationship of individual-level alcohol use or alcohol use disorder (AUD) with firearm ownership, access, unsafe storage, or carrying indicated a strong and consistent positive association. Seven studies examined associations of individual-level alcohol use or AUD with firearm injury or death; these also indicated a pattern of positive associations, but the magnitude and precision of the estimates varied. Eight studies examined the impact of neighborhood proximity or density of alcohol outlets and found mixed results that were context- and study design-dependent. Two studies linked prior alcohol-related offenses to increased risk of firearm suicide and perpetration of violent firearm crimes among a large cohort of people who purchased handguns, and two studies linked policies prohibiting firearm access among individuals with a history of alcohol-related offenses to reductions in firearm homicide and suicide. Finally, four studies examined alcohol control policies and found that greater restrictiveness was generally associated with reductions in firearm homicide or firearm suicide. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this scoping review continue to support a causal relationship between alcohol exposures and firearm violence that extends beyond acute alcohol use to include AUD and alcohol-related policies. Policies controlling the availability of alcohol and prohibiting firearm access among individuals with alcohol-related offense histories show promise for the prevention of firearm violence. Additional research examining differential impacts by population subgroup, alcohol use among perpetrators of firearm violence, policies restricting alcohol outlet density, and randomized or quasi-experimental study designs with longitudinal follow-up would further support inferences to inform prevention efforts.

Alcohol Research: Current Reviews,  2025;45(1):01, 29p.

By Jessica H. Beard, Jennifer Midberry, Iman N. Afifa, Elizabeth Dauera, Jim MacMillanc, Sara F. Jacoby 

Media reports on interpersonal firearm violence largely present it as a crime issue focused on individual shooting events. This episodic framing can undermine support for public health solutions to firearm violence. The potential harms of this narrative on firearm-injured people are unknown. We aimed to understand how recently firearm-injured people perceive the meaning and impact of news media reporting on their own injuries and firearm violence in their communities. This study was conducted in the trauma clinic of the busiest trauma center for firearm injuries in Philadelphia, PA, USA. We consecutively recruited adult firearm-injured patients for semi-structured qualitative interviews within two months of their injury. Interview content was thematically analyzed. Twenty-six patients consented and participated. Results indicate that participants largely felt negative or conflicted about “making the news” and perceived several harms associated with media reports on their injuries, including dehumanization they connected with episodic-style reports, reliving trauma when viewing news, distress related to inaccuracies, threats to personal safety when specific details were included harm to reputation, and negative impacts on public perceptions of safety and community. Participants who did not make the news often reported relief and generally did not expect their stories to be reported. These findings suggest that firearm-injured people perceive multiple harms associated with episodic narratives that neglect their viewpoints. Journalists and public health practitioners should work together with communities to identify strategies to reframe firearm violence as a public health problem through reporting that is trauma-informed and incorporates the perspectives of firearm-injured people.

SSM - Qualitative Research in HealthVolume 3, June 2023,