Background: Peer support refers to a process whereby individuals with lived experience of a particular phenomenon provide support to others by explicitly drawing on their personal experience. It has been adopted in a variety of service contexts including homelessness, substance use, mental and physical health. Those who experience homelessness have some of the most complex intersecting health and social challenges. This ‘state of the art’ review provides a systematic search and synthesis of literature examining use of peer support models within services for people impacted by homelessness and problem substance use. Methods: A systematic search using six databases (CINAHL, SocINDEX, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Knowledge) was conducted in August 2019 and identified 2248 papers published in English after the year 2000. After de-duplication and scanning titles/abstracts, 61 papers were deemed relevant. Three more papers (including one grey literature report) were identified via references, but two papers were later excluded due to relevance. The final 62 papers included studies conducted in five countries. A thematic analysis approach was used to compare and contrast the study findings and provide a synthesis of the main learning points. Results: In recent years there has been a substantial increase in research examining the utility of peer support yet there is significant variation across this field. Alongside profiling the range of settings, aims, populations, and main outcomes of these studies, this paper also provides an overview of overarching themes: the overall effectiveness and impact of peer-staffed or peer-led interventions; and challenges commonly faced in these roles. Five themes relating to the challenges faced by peers were identified: vulnerability, authenticity, boundaries, stigma, and lack of recognition. Conclusions: While our findings provide support for current efforts to involve individuals with lived experience in providing peer support to those experiencing concurrent problem substance use and homelessness, they also urge caution because of common pitfalls that can leave those providing the support vulnerable. We conclude that peers should be respected, valued, supported, and compensated for their work which is often profoundly challenging. Suggested guidelines for the implementation of peer involvement in research studies and service delivery are presented.

Overdose prevention for people who use illicit drugs is essential during the current overdose crisis. Peer support is a process whereby individuals with lived or living experience of a particular phenomenon provide support to others by explicitly drawing on these experiences. This review provides a systematic search and evidence synthesis of peer support within overdose prevention interventions for people who use illicit drugs. A systematic search of six databases (CINAHL, SocINDEX, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Knowledge) was conducted in November 2020 for papers published in English between 2000 and 2020. Following screening and full-text review, 46 papers met criteria and were included in this review. A thematic analysis approach was used to synthesize themes. Important findings include: the value of peers in creating trusted services; the diversity of peers’ roles; the implications of barriers on peer-involved overdose prevention interventions; and the stress and trauma experienced by peers. Peers play a pivotal role in overdose prevention interventions for people who use illicit drugs and are essential to the acceptability and feasibility of such services. However, peers face considerable challenges within their roles, including trauma and burnout. Future interventions must consider how to support and strengthen peer roles in overdose settings.

Waiting is a universal experience and a ‘taken for granted’ form of time. However, it is given a social specificity when embodied by particular agents in particular settings. This paper reflects on the universal experience of waiting in the very particular setting of the prison, specifically a prison visitors’ centre; this is the space where families wait prior to visiting their incarcerated relatives. I draw on the literature of waiting and prisoners’ families, as well as my own empirical work and ethnographic observations of waiting families. In this work, I explore issues of power and agency, and explore the social relations which are orchestrated within and beyond this organisation of space and time. This paper aims to bring together two distinct areas of literature: one which explores how prisoners ‘do time’, and the other which explores the impact of imprisonment on the families outside. In marrying the two, this paper explores the temporal impact of the imprisonment on the family members of those incarcerated.

Background: For people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, access to appropriate services can be challenging. There is evidence that development of trusting relationships with non-judgemental staff can facilitate service engagement. Peer-delivered approaches show particular promise, but the evidence base is still developing. This study tested the feasibility and acceptability of a peer-delivered intervention, through ‘Peer Navigators’, to support people who are homeless with problem substance use to address a range of health and social issues.Objectives: The study objectives were to design and implement a peer-delivered, relational intervention to reduce harms and improve health/well-being, quality of life and social functioning for people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, and to conduct a concurrent process evaluation to inform a future randomised controlled trial.Design: A mixed-methods feasibility study with concurrent process evaluation was conducted, involving qualitative interviews [staff interviews (one time point),n = 12; Peer Navigator interviews (three or four time points),n = 15; intervention participant interviews: first time point,n = 24, and second time point,n = 10], observations and quantitative outcome measures.Setting: The intervention was delivered in three outreach services for people who are homeless in Scotland, and three Salvation Army hostels in England; there were two standard care settings: an outreach service in Scotland and a hostel in England.Participants: Participants were people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use (n = 68) (intervention).Intervention: This was a peer-delivered, relational intervention drawing on principles of psychologically informed environments, with Peer Navigators providing practical and emotional support.Main outcome measures: Outcomes relating to participants’ substance use, participants’ physical and mental health needs, and the quality of Peer Navigator relationships were measured via a ‘holistic health check’, with six questionnaires completed at two time points: a specially created sociodemographic, health and housing status questionnaire; the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items plus the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7; the Maudsley Addiction Profile; the Substance Use Recovery Evaluator; the RAND Corporation Short Form survey-36 items; and the Consultation and Relational Empathy Measure.Results: The Supporting Harm Reduction through Peer Support (SHARPS) study was found to be acceptable to, and feasible for, intervention participants, staff and Peer Navigators. Among participants, there was reduced drug use and an increase in the number of prescriptions for opioid substitution therapy. There were reductions in risky injecting practice and risky sexual behaviour. Participants reported improvements to service engagement and felt more equipped to access services on their own. The lived experience of the Peer Navigators was highlighted as particularly helpful, enabling the development of trusting, authentic and meaningful relationships. The relationship with the Peer Navigator was measured as excellent at baseline and follow-up. Some challenges were experienced in relation to the ‘fit’ of the intervention within some settings and will inform future studies.Limitations: Some participants did not complete the outcome measures, or did not complete both sets, meaning that we do not have baseline and/or follow-up data for all. The standard care data sample sizes make comparison between settings limited.Conclusions: A randomised controlled trial is recommended to assess the effectiveness of the Peer Navigator intervention.Future work: A definitive cluster randomised controlled trial should particularly consider setting selection, outcomes and quantitative data collection instruments.Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN15900054.Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 14. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

While people who are homeless often experience poor mental and physical health and problem substance use, getting access to appropriate services can be challenging. The development of trusting relationships with non-judgemental staff can facilitate initial and sustained engagement with health and wider support services. Peer-delivered approaches seem to have particular promise, but there is limited evidence regarding peer interventions that are both acceptable to, and effective for, people who are homeless and using drugs and/or alcohol. In the proposed study, we will develop and test the use of a peer-to-peer relational intervention with people experiencing homelessness. Drawing on the concept of psychologically informed environments, it will focus on building trusting and supportive relationships and providing practical elements of support such as access to primary care, treatment and housing options. A mixed-method feasibility study with concurrent process evaluation will be conducted to explore the feasibility and acceptability of a peer-delivered, relational intervention for people with problem substance use who are homeless. Peer Navigators will be based in homelessness outreach and residential services in Scotland and England. Peer Navigators will work with a small number of participants for up to 12 months providing both practical and emotional support. The sample size for the intervention is 60. Those receiving the intervention must be currently homeless or at risk of homelessness, over the age of 18 years and self-report alcohol/drug problems. A holistic health check will be conducted in the first few months of the intervention and repeated towards the end. Health checks will be conducted by a researcher in the service where the Peer Navigator is based. Semi-structured qualitative interviews with intervention participants and staff in both intervention and standard care settings, and all Peer Navigators, will be conducted to explore their experiences with the intervention. Non-participant observation will be conducted in intervention and standard care sites to document similarities and differences between care pathways. The SHARPS study will provide evidence regarding whether a peer-delivered harm reduction intervention is feasible and acceptable to people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use in order to develop a definitive trial. SRCTN registry ISRCTN15900054 , protocol version 1.3, March 12, 2018

There is widespread support for the introduction of Drug Consumption Rooms (DCRs) in Scotland as part of a policy response to record levels of drug-related harm. However, existing legal barriers are made more complex by the division of relevant powers between the UK and Scottish Governments. This paper reports on a national, qualitative study of key decision-makers in both local and national roles across Scotland. It explores views on the political barriers and enablers to the adoption of Drug Consumption Rooms and the potential role of these facilities in the wider treatment system. It also considers approaches to evidence, especially the types of evidence that are considered valuable in supporting decision-making in this area. The study found that Scottish decision-makers are strongly supportive of DCR adoption; however, they remain unclear as to the legal and political mechanisms that would make this possible. They view DCRs as part of a complex treatment and support system rather than a uniquely transformative intervention. They see the case for introduction as sufficient, on the basis of need and available evidence, thus adopting a pragmatic and iterative approach to evidence, in contrast to an appeal to traditional evidence hierarchies more commonly adopted by the UK Government.