What impacts the acceptability of wearable devices that detect opioid overdose in people who use opioids? A qualitative study

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionDrug‐related deaths involving an opioid are at all‐time highs across the United Kingdom. Current overdose antidotes (naloxone) require events to be witnessed and recognised for reversal. Wearable technologies have potential for remote overdose detection or response but their acceptability among people who use opioids (PWUO) is not well understood. This study explored facilitators and barriers to wearable technology acceptability to PWUO.MethodsTwenty‐four participants (79% male, average age 46 years) with current (n = 15) and past (n = 9) illicit heroin use and 54% (n = 13) who were engaged in opioid substitution therapy participated in semi‐structured interviews (n = 7) and three focus groups (n = 17) in London and Nottingham from March to June 2022. Participants evaluated real devices, discussing characteristics, engagement factors, target populations, implementation strategies and preferences. Conversations were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed.ResultsThree themes emerged: device‐, person‐ and environment‐specific factors impacting acceptability. Facilitators included inconspicuousness under the device theme and targeting subpopulations of PWUO at the individual theme. Barriers included affordability of devices and limited technology access within the environment theme. Trust in device accuracy for high and overdose differentiation was a crucial facilitator, while trust between technology and PWUO was a significant environmental barrier.Discussion and ConclusionsDeterminants of acceptability can be categorised into device, person and environmental factors. PWUO, on the whole, require devices that are inconspicuous, comfortable, accessible, easy to use, controlled by trustworthy organisations and highly accurate. Device developers must consider how the type of end‐user and their environment moderate acceptability of the device.