A novel naloxone distribution intervention among persons experiencing unsheltered homelessness: acceptability of naloxone training and distribution during an annual point-in-time count.

BACKGROUND

The United States is experiencing an intersecting crisis of structural inequities, record levels of homelessness, and a surging fourth wave of the opioid epidemic. People experiencing unsheltered homelessness (PEUH) are at particularly high risk of opioid-related death. Although naloxone is a key tool for preventing overdose fatalities, PEUH face significant barriers to accessing and retaining it. This study examined the acceptability of a novel overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) intervention implemented during Kern County's 2024 Point-in-Time (PIT) unsheltered count. As part of the initiative, volunteers were offered optional OEND training prior to distributing naloxone to PEUH during the annual PIT Count.

METHODS

Naloxone distribution was tracked, and PIT Count volunteers were recruited via convenience sampling to complete a post-intervention electronic survey. The survey assessed acceptability using domains from the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to evaluate responses related to OEND training and naloxone distribution.

RESULTS

Of 111 survey initiators, 94 met eligibility criteria. Most respondents (71.3%) participated in the OEND training, and nearly two-thirds (64.9%) distributed naloxone. Among those with prior overdose experience (n = 26), 88.5% had taken bystander action, most often administering naloxone or calling 911. Training participants reported positive affective attitudes (mean = 1.57), high perceived effectiveness (mean = 1.58), low burden (mean = 1.89), and low opportunity cost (mean = 4.40 on a reverse scale), with slightly lower self-efficacy (mean = 2.23). Overall acceptability was high (mean = 1.45). Among naloxone distributors, responses indicated strong comfort (mean = 1.6), confidence (mean = 1.7), coherence (mean = 1.6), and acceptability (mean = 1.8), along with low burden (mean = 1.9) and opportunity cost (mean = 4.5). Over 87% expressed willingness to distribute naloxone in future PIT Counts. Non-distributors cited reasons such as lack of opportunity, participant refusal, and discomfort. Open-ended responses suggested improvements in training availability, logistics, and messaging for PEUH.

CONCLUSIONS

Naloxone training and distribution during the PIT Count was feasible and highly acceptable. These findings support broader implementation to improve naloxone access and reduce overdose deaths among PEUH, and they provide a foundation for future effectiveness studies.