This study introduces a simulation-optimization framework designed to optimize the services of opioid-focused harm reduction vending machines (HRVMs). Given the rising rates of overdose deaths and increased potential for infectious diseases among persons who inject drugs (PWID), HRVMs can become an important harm reduction (HR) strategy by providing essential supplies that mitigate health risks.
Methods
We developed and validated an agent-based simulation–optimization framework to model the impact of HRVM-item allocation on the burden of opioid-related harms, accounting for demand dynamics, item restocking, and regional characteristics. The model evaluated health outcomes—cases of HIV, HCV, and fatal and nonfatal overdose—using disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Scenario-based analyses were conducted for different HRVM configurations, considering current legal limits on safer-injection supplies, fentanyl’s growing role as a drug of choice, and potential future policy changes.
Results
The base scenario estimated optimal HRVM capacity allocation at approximately 48.5% fentanyl test strips (FTS), 26.2% naloxone, and 25.3% safer injection kits. However, sensitivity analyses showed significant variations based on fentanyl prevalence and willingness to use FTS. In scenarios of intentional fentanyl use with high FTS utilization, allocation favored FTS, while scenarios with low FTS utilization prioritized naloxone and injection kits. Adding addiction treatment referral services to HRVMs further reduced DALYs and societal costs, primarily by preventing fatal overdoses. Safer injection kits consistently reduced blood-borne infections compared with scenarios without these kits.
Conclusions
The framework could aid in HRVMãrelated service planning and evaluation, highlighting the importance of strategic inventory management and linkages to addiction care for enhanced health outcomes. HRVMs show potential as scalable, cost-effective HR interventions, warranting further research on their impact on service accessibility and health outcomes.
Highlights
A novel simulation-optimization framework for designing and evaluating harm reduction vending machines (HRVMs) is presented.
Optimal baseline allocation for products in the HRVMs included fentanyl test strips (48.5%), naloxone (26.2%), and safer injection kits (25.3%).
Sensitivity analysis indicated optimal allocations vary substantially by local fentanyl prevalence and by individual harm reduction behaviors surrounding the use of fentanyl test strips.
HRVM implementation reduces societal costs and disability-adjusted life-years associated with substance use–related harms.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United States: Results from the 2023 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Washington (DC): US Department of Health and Human Services; 2023.
3.
National Research Council (US) Committee on Health Impact Assessment. Why we need health-informed policies and decision-making. In: Improving Health in the United States: The Role of Health Impact Assessment. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2011. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK83538/
PerlmanDCJordanAE.The syndemic of opioid misuse, overdose, HCV, and HIV: structural-level causes and interventions. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2018;15(2):96–112.
6.
BurrisS.Where next for opioids and the law? Despair, harm reduction, lawsuits, and regulatory reform. Public Health Rep. 2018;133(1):29–33.
7.
FreemanPRHankoskyERLofwallMRTalbertJC.The changing landscape of naloxone availability in the United States, 2011–2017. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018;191:361–4.
8.
PeiperNCClarkeSDVincentLBCiccaroneDKralAHZibbellJE.Fentanyl test strips as an opioid overdose prevention strategy: findings from a syringe services program in the Southeastern United States. Int J Drug Policy. 2019;63:122–8.
9.
McKnightCWengCAReynosoMKimballSThompsonLMJarlaisDD.Understanding intentionality of fentanyl use and drug overdose risk: findings from a mixed methods study of people who inject drugs in New York City. Int J Drug Policy. 2023;118:104063.
10.
CiccaroneD.The rise of illicit fentanyls, stimulants and the fourth wave of the opioid overdose crisis. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2021;34(4):344–50.
11.
McDonaldD.The evaluation of a trial of syringe vending machines in Canberra, Australia. Int J Drug Policy. 2009;20(4):336–9.
12.
OtiashviliDKirtadzeIVardanashviliITabatadzeMOberAJ.Perceived acceptability of and willingness to use syringe vending machines: results of a cross-sectional survey of out-of-service people who inject drugs in Tbilisi, Georgia. Harm Reduct J. 2019;16(1):21.
13.
DoddingJGaughwinM.The syringe in the machine. Aust J Public Health. 1995;19(4):406–9.
14.
NellesJFuhrerAHirsbrunnerHHardingT.Provision of syringes: the cutting edge of harm reduction in prison?BMJ. 1998;317(7153):270–3.
15.
ObadiaYFeroniIPerrinVVlahovDMoattiJP.Syringe vending machines for injection drug users: an experiment in Marseille, France. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(12):1852–4.
16.
StarkKLeichtAMüllerR.Characteristics of users of syringe vending machines in Berlin. Soz Praventivmed. 1994;39(4):209–16.
PaquetteCESyvertsenJLPolliniRA.Stigma at every turn: health services experiences among people who inject drugs. Int J Drug Policy. 2018;57:104–10.
19.
ArumCFraserHArtenieAA, et al. Homelessness, unstable housing, and risk of HIV and hepatitis C virus acquisition among people who inject drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Public Health. 2021;6(5):e309–23.
20.
AustinEJTsuiJIBarryMP, et al. Health care-seeking experiences for people who inject drugs with hepatitis C: qualitative explorations of stigma. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2022;137:108684.
21.
DavisJMSuletaKCorsiKFBoothRE.A hazard analysis of risk factors of mortality in individuals who inject drugs in Denver CO. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(4):1044–53.
22.
AllenSTO’RourkeAJohnson JessicaA, et al. Evaluating the impact of naloxone dispensation at public health vending machines in Clark County, Nevada. Ann Med. 2022;54(1):2680–8.
23.
ArendtD.Expanding the accessibility of harm reduction services in the United States: measuring the impact of an automated harm reduction dispensing machine. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2023;63(1):309–16.
24.
DayCAWhiteBHaberPS.The impact of an automatic syringe dispensing machine in inner-city Sydney, Australia: no evidence of a “honey-pot” effect. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2016;35(5):637–43.
25.
IslamMMWodakAConigraveKM.The effectiveness and safety of syringe vending machines as a component of needle syringe programmes in community settings. Int J Drug Policy. 2008;19(6):436–41.
26.
UthurraltNMcGlinnAO’DonnellMHaberPSDayCA.The impact of a 24-hour syringe dispensing machine on a face-to-face needle and syringe program and targeted primary healthcare clinic. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2022;46(4):524–6.
27.
KrauszMRWongJSHMoazen-ZadehEJangKL.Been there, done that: lessons from Vancouver’s efforts to stem the tide of overdose deaths. Can J Psychiatry. 2020;65(6):377–80.
28.
StewartRECardamoneNCLoscalzoE, et al. “There’s absolutely no downside to this, I mean, except community opposition:” a qualitative study of the acceptability of vending machines for harm reduction. Harm Reduct J. 2023;20(1):25.
29.
ThakararKKohutMHutchinsonR, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people who inject drugs accessing harm reduction services in a rural American state. Harm Reduct J. 2022;19(1):80.
AronsonIDBennettAMarschLABaniaTC.Mobile technology to increase HIV/HCV testing and overdose prevention/response among people who inject drugs. Front Public Health [Internet]. 2017;5:217.
32.
AugustovskiFColantonioLDGalanteJ, et al. Measuring the benefits of healthcare: DALYs and QALYs—does the choice of measure matter? A case study of two preventive interventions. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;7(2):120–36.
33.
ChenQGriffinPMKawasakiSS.Disability-adjusted life-years for drug overdose crisis and COVID-19 are comparable during the two years of pandemic in the United States. Value Health. 2023;26(6):796–801.
BashiriMSamaeiF. Heuristic and metaheuristic structure of response surface methodology in process optimization. IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management. Singapore: IEEE; 2011. p 1495–9.
36.
GoemaereIPunjDHarizajA, et al. Response surface methodology to efficiently optimize intracellular delivery by photoporation. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(4):3147.
SteinMDKenneySRAndersonBJBaileyGL.Perceptions about fentanyl-adulterated heroin and overdose risk reduction behaviors among persons seeking treatment for heroin use. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2019;104:144–7.
39.
BureshMGicquelaisREAstemborskiJKirkGDMehtaSHGenbergBL.Fatal overdose prevention and experience with naloxone: a cross-sectional study from a community-based cohort of people who inject drugs in Baltimore, Maryland. PLoS One. 2020;15(3):e0230127.
40.
GenbergBLGicquelaisREAstemborskiJ, et al. Trends in fatal and nonfatal overdose by race among people who inject drugs in Baltimore, Maryland from 1998 to 2019. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2021;229:109152.
41.
KrawczykNEisenbergMSchneiderKE, et al. Predictors of overdose death among high-risk emergency department patients with substance-related encounters: a data linkage cohort study. Ann Emerg Med. 2020;75(1):1–12.
42.
ParkJNFrankelSMorrisM, et al. Evaluation of fentanyl test strip distribution in two Mid-Atlantic syringe services programs. Int J Drug Policy. 2021;94:103196.
43.
MarottaPLStringerKBeletskyL, et al. Assessing the relationship between syringe exchange, pharmacy, and street sources of accessing syringes and injection drug use behavior in a pooled nationally representative sample of people who inject drugs in the United States from 2002 to 2019. Harm Reduct J. 2021;18(1):115.
44.
TranLTPeacockAColledgeS, et al. Injecting risk behaviours amongst people who inject drugs: a global multi-stage systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Drug Policy. 2020;84:102866.
45.
OhHKimKMillerDVelosoDLinJMcFarlandW.Fentanyl self-testing in a community-based sample of people who inject drugs, San Francisco. Int J Drug Policy. 2020;82:102787.
46.
AbdelalRRaja BanerjeeACarlberg-RacichS, et al. Real-world study of multiple naloxone administration for opioid overdose reversal among bystanders. Harm Reduct J. 2022;19(1):49.
47.
GrebelyJLarneySPeacockA, et al. Global, regional, and country-level estimates of hepatitis C infection among people who have recently injected drugs. Addiction. 2019;114(1):150–66.
48.
BoelenLTeutschSWilsonDP, et al. Per-event probability of hepatitis C infection during sharing of injecting equipment. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e100749.
HandanagicSFinlaysonTBurnettJC, et al. HIV infection and HIV-associated behaviors among persons who inject drugs—23 metropolitan statistical areas, United States, 2018. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021;70(42):1459–65.
51.
StrathdeeSAKuoIEl-BasselNHodderSSmithLRSpringerSA.Preventing HIV outbreaks among people who inject drugs in the United States: Plus ça Change, Plus ça Même Chose. AIDS. 2020;34(14):1997–2005.
52.
PatelPBorkowfCBBrooksJTLasryALanskyAMerminJ.Estimating per-act HIV transmission risk: a systematic review. AIDS. 2014;28(10):1509–19.
53.
BehrendsCNPaoneDNolanML, et al. Estimated impact of supervised injection facilities on overdose fatalities and healthcare costs in New York City. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2019;106:79–88.
54.
AllenSRuizMO’RourkeA.How far will they go?: assessing the travel distance of current and former drug users to access harm reduction services. Harm Reduct J. 2015;12(1):3.
55.
DeBeckKKerrTLaiCBuxtonJMontanerJWoodE.The validity of reporting willingness to use a supervised injecting facility on subsequent program use among people who use injection drugs. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2012;38(1):55–62.
GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1204–22.
KrajdenMKuoMZagorskiBAlvarezMYuAKrahnM.Health care costs associated with hepatitis C: a longitudinal cohort study. Can J Gastroenterol. 2010;24(12):717–26.
LuoFLiMFlorenceC.State-level economic costs of opioid use disorder and fatal opioid overdose—United States, 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021;70:541–6.
62.
BallFSirlDTrapmanP.Analysis of a stochastic SIR epidemic on a random network incorporating household structure. Math Biosci. 2010;224(2):53–73.
63.
CousienATranVCDeuffic-BurbanS, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of interventions targeting harm reduction and chronic hepatitis C cascade of care in people who inject drugs: the case of France. J Viral Hepat. 2018;25(10):1197–207.
64.
RusdiansyahATsaoD-B.An integrated model of the periodic delivery problems for vending-machine supply chains. J Food Eng. 2005;70(3):421–34.
65.
GagnonM.It’s time to allow assisted injection in supervised injection sites. CMAJ. 2017;189(34):E1083–4.
66.
ArmoonBGriffithsMDBayaniAMohammadiRAhounbarE.Prevalence and associates of non-fatal overdose among people who inject drugs in Saveh, Iran. Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2022;17(1):42.
67.
OtachiJKVundiNSurrattHL.Examining factors associated with non-fatal overdose among people who inject drugs in rural Appalachia. Subst Use Misuse. 2020;55(12):1935–42.
68.
WagnerNMKempeABarnardJG, et al. Qualitative exploration of public health vending machines in young adults who misuse opioids: a promising strategy to increase naloxone access in a high risk underserved population. Drug Alcohol Depend Rep. 2022;5:100094.
69.
SalkinHMDe KluyverCA.The knapsack problem: a survey. Nav Res Logist. 1975;22(1):127–44.
70.
MeratiMCastañónD.Dynamic network flow optimization for task scheduling in PTZ camera surveillance systems. 2025. Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.04596. [Accessed 13 May, 2025].
ArtenieAStoneJFraserH, et al. Incidence of HIV and hepatitis C virus among people who inject drugs, and associations with age and sex or gender: a global systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023;8(6):533–52.
73.
DegenhardtLWebbPColledge-FrisbyS, et al. Epidemiology of injecting drug use, prevalence of injecting-related harm, and exposure to behavioural and environmental risks among people who inject drugs: a systematic review. Lancet Glob Health. 2023;11(5):e659–72.
GriffinPMScherrerCRSwannJL.Optimization of community health center locations and service offerings with statistical need estimation. IIE Trans. 2008;40(9):880–92.
76.
GreerAMLuchenskiSAAmlaniAALacroixKBurmeisterCBuxtonJA.Peer engagement in harm reduction strategies and services: a critical case study and evaluation framework from British Columbia, Canada. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):452.
77.
MilaneyKHaines-SaahRFarkasB, et al. A scoping review of opioid harm reduction interventions for equity-deserving populations. Lancet Reg Health Am. 2022;12:100271.
78.
CanoMDaniulaityteRMarsigliaF.Xylazine in overdose deaths and forensic drug reports in US states, 2019–2022. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(1):e2350630.
79.
ReedMKSalcedoVJGuthARisingKL.“If I had them, I would use them every time”: perspectives on fentanyl test strip use from people who use drugs. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2022;140:108790.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
