Dataset Information

Self-perception of assisting with future injection drug initiation: The influence of relationships in the process of drug injecting initiation.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction and aims

People who inject drugs (PWID) play critical roles in assisting others into injection drug use (IDU) initiation. Understanding perceptions of PWID's risk of initiating others is needed to inform interventions for prevention. The objective was to examine factors associated with self-perception of assisting with future IDU initiation events. The primary variables of interest are the relationships of PWID with the person(s) they assisted and their reasons for previously providing initiation assistance.

Design and methods

Data from Preventing Injecting by Modifying Existing Responses, a multi-site prospective community-recruited cohort study, were analysed. Analyses were restricted to PWID who reported ever providing IDU initiation assistance. Site-specific (Vancouver, Canada [n = 746]; San Diego, USA [n = 95] and Tijuana, Mexico [n = 92]) multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine factors associated with self-perception of assisting with future IDU initiation.

Results

Having provided IDU initiation assistance to a family member or intimate partner decreased the odds of self-perception of assisting with future IDU initiation in Vancouver (AOR = 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.8); however, previous IDU initiation assistance to an 'other' increased the odds of self-perception of assisting with future IDU in Tijuana (AOR = 12.0; 95% CI 2.1-70.3). Daily IDU (Vancouver: AOR = 3.7; 95% CI 2.1-6.4) and less than daily IDU (San Diego: AOR = 5.9; 95% CI 1.3-27.1) (Vancouver: AOR = 2.6; 95% CI 1.4-2.9) were associated with increased self-perception of assisting with future IDU compared to current non-injectors.

Discussion and conclusions

Relationship to past initiates and IDU frequency might increase PWID's self-perception of assisting with future IDU. Interventions focused on social support and reducing IDU frequency may decrease occurrences of IDU initiation assistance.

SUBMITTER: Bloom BE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7977721 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWe estimate the prevalence of drug injection, the variables associated with having ever injected and the proportion of ever injectors whose first drug injection was for having sex; we describe the first drug injection episode, analyze the drugs most frequently injected and estimate the prevalence of risky injecting behaviors.MethodsThe participants were 3387 MSM without a previous HIV diagnosis attending four HIV/STI diagnosis services in Madrid and Barcelona. Lifetime prevalence and prevalence ratios (PRs) by different factors were calculated using Poisson regression models with robust variance. We compared the characteristics of first drug injection episode, lifetime injection and risky injecting behaviors of those whose first injection was for sex (FIS) with those whose was not (non-FIS).ResultsLifetime prevalence of injection was 2.1% (CI 1.7-2.7). In the multivariate analysis, it was strongly associated with having been penetrated by more than five men in the last 12 months (aPR = 10.4; CI 2.5-43.4) and having met most of their partners at private parties (aPR = 7.5; CI 4.5-12.3), and less strongly with other factors. Of those who had ever injected drugs, 81.9% injected for sex the first time they injected drugs (FIS). At first injection, FIS participants had a mean age of 31 years, 62.7% used mephedrone and 32.2% methamphetamine on that occasion. Of this FIS group 39.0% had ever shared drugs or equipment and 82.6% had always shared for sex. Some 30.8% of non-FIS reported having also injected drugs for sex later on.ConclusionsOnly two out of a hundred had ever injected, most to have sex and with frequent drug or injecting equipment sharing. Injecting for sex is the most common first episode of drug injection and is the most efficient risky behavior for the transmission of HIV, hepatitis B or C and other blood-borne infections. MSM participating in private parties should be considered a priority group for prevention policies.

Project description:BACKGROUND:People who inject drugs with sexual partners or close friends have high rates of syringe/ancillary equipment sharing and HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Although evidence suggests that interpersonal factors underlie these higher risk profiles, there is no quantitative measure of how interpersonal factors operate within injecting relationships. We aimed to develop and validate a quantitative scale to assess levels of injecting drug-related interpersonal factors associated with risky injecting behaviours within injecting partnerships. METHODS:We conducted qualitative interviews with 45 people who inject drugs (PWID) who reported having injecting partners to inform item development, and tested these items in a quantitative study of 140 PWID from San Francisco, USA, to assess internal reliability (Cronbach's alpha) and validity (convergent, and discriminant validity). RESULTS:With results from the qualitative interview data, we developed the Interpersonal Dynamics in Injecting Partnerships (IDIP) scale with 54 final items for 5 subscales of injecting-related interpersonal factors. Exploratory factor analysis revealed 5 factors ("trust", "power", "risk perception", "intimacy", and "cooperation") with eigenvalues of 14.32, 6.18, 3.55, 2.46, and 2.14, explaining 57% of the variance, and indicating good internal reliability (alpha: 0.92-0.68). Strong convergent validity was observed in bivariate logistic regression models where higher levels of trust, intimacy, and cooperation within partnerships were positively associated with partners sharing needles and injecting equipment, whereas higher levels of power and risk perception were negatively associated with partners sharing needles and injecting equipment. CONCLUSIONS:These findings offer strong evidence that the IDIP scale provides a psychometrically sound measure of injecting drug-related interpersonal dynamics. This measurement tool has the potential to facilitate additional investigations into the individual and collective impact of trust, intimacy, power, cooperation, and risk perception on injection drug using behaviours and engagement in HIV and HCV testing and treatment among PWID in a variety of settings.

Project description:BackgroundInjection drug use is an important public health problem. Epidemiological understanding of this problem is incomplete as longitudinal studies in the general population are difficult to undertake. In particular little is known about early life risk factors for later drug injection or about the life course of injection once established including the influence of medical and social interventions.MethodsIndividuals thought to be drug injectors were identified through a single primary medical care facility in Edinburgh between 1980 and 2006 and flagged with the General Registry Office. From October 2005 - October 2007, these cases were traced and invited to undergo interview assessment covering early life experience, substance use, health and social histories. Age and sex matched controls for confirmed cases (alive and dead) were later recruited through the same health facility. Controls for living cases completed the same structured interview schedule. Data were also collected on cases and controls through linkage to routine primary care records, death registrations, hospital contact statistics and police and prison records. All interviews were conducted with the knowledge and permission of the current GP.ResultsThe initial cohort size was 814. At start of follow up 227 had died. Of the remaining 587: 20 had no contact details and 5 had embarked from the UK; 40 declined participation; 38 did not respond to invitations; 14 were excluded by their GP on health or social grounds and 22 had their contact details withheld by administrative authorities. 448 were interviewed of whom 16 denied injection and were excluded. Of 191 dead cases with medical records 4 were excluded as their records contained no evidence of injection. 5 interviewed cases died before follow up was concluded though these individuals were counted as "live" cases. 1 control per case (dead and alive) was recruited. Linkage to Scottish Morbidity Records data (available from 1981 onwards) on general acute inpatient and day cases, mental health inpatient and day cases and cancer was provided by Information Services, NHS Scotland, for all cases interviewed and all dead cases. The Scottish Prison Service provided records for 198 (46%) of cases interviewed, 48 cases not interviewed and 34 (18%) of dead cases. For a sub-sample of 100 interviewees a search of the Lothian and Borders police database was made for official criminal records and 94 had criminal records. Data linkage for controls is ongoing.ConclusionsInjecting drug users recruited from a community setting can be successfully followed-up through interviews and record linkage. Information from injecting cases is being analysed in terms of injecting patterns and possible influences on these. Comparisons between cases and controls will allow identification of possibly modifiable early life risk factors for drug injection and will also clarify the burden of disease associated with injection and the influence on this of different health and social interventions.

Project description:BackgroundAddiction treatment and harm reduction services reduce risks of death and re-infection among patients with injection drug use-associated infective endocarditis (IDU-IE), but these are not offered at many hospitals. Among hospitalized patients with IDU-IE at the two tertiary-care hospitals in the Canadian Maritimes, we aimed to identify (1) the availability of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) and sterile drug injecting equipment, and (2) indicators of potential unmet addiction care needs.MethodsRetrospective review of IDU-IE hospitalizations at Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre (Halifax, Nova Scotia) and the Saint John Regional Hospital (Saint John, New Brunswick), October 2015 -March 2017. In Halifax, there are no addiction medicine providers on staff; in Saint John, infectious diseases physicians also practice addiction medicine. Inclusion criteria were: (1) probable or definite IE as defined by the modified Duke criteria; and (2) injection drug use within the prior 3 months.ResultsWe identified 38 hospitalizations (21 in Halifax and 17 in Saint John), for 30 unique patients. Among patients with IDU-IE and untreated opioid use disorder, OAT was offered to 36% (5/14) of patients in Halifax and 100% (6/6) of patients in Saint John. Once it was offered, most patients at both sites initiated OAT and planned to continue it after discharge. In Halifax, no patients were offered sterile injecting equipment, and during five hospitalizations staff confiscated patients' own equipment. In Saint John, four patients were offered (and one was provided) injecting equipment in hospital, and during two hospitalizations staff confiscated patients' own equipment. Concerns regarding undertreated pain or opioid withdrawal were documented during 66% (25/38) of hospitalizations, and in-hospital illicit or non-medical drug use during 32% (12/38). Two patients at each site (11%; 4/38) had self-directed discharges against medical advice.ConclusionsPatients with IDU-IE in the Canadian Maritimes have unequal access to evidence-based addiction care depending on where they are hospitalized, which differs from the community-based standard of care. Indicators of potential unmet addiction care needs in hospital were common.