China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
From patient involvement in clinical guidance to lay involvement in public health guidance
Published in Peter Littlejohns, Patients, the Public and Priorities in Healthcare, 2018
➤ A third category of guidance projects focuses on a more easily defined population group yet the views of the wider community may also be relevant. For example, guidance on needle and syringe programmes is targeted at injecting drug users. Although this client group is relatively defined, the views and experiences of the wider community are also relevant because needle and syringe programmes need to operate successfully within community settings.
Substance use and HIV: some considerations in a global context
Published in AIDS Care, 2023
The United Nations Office on AIDS has identified various interventions to prevent HIV among intravenous drug users which are (1) sterile syringe access through needle and syringe programmes; (2) opioid substitution treatment through methadone and buprenorphine; (3) HIV counseling and testing; (4) enrolment on antiretroviral programmes; (5) prevention and treatment of sexually transmitted infections; (6) condom distribution programmes; (7) information and education campaigns; (8) vaccination and treatment of viral hepatitis, and (9) prevention and treatment of tuberculosis (WHO & others, 2009). Yet, the implementation of these interventions is uneven in most countries, leading to an increased need for countries and agencies to allocate prevention and treatment resources to empirically-supported and cost-effective interventions. In some instances resources may be channelled away from IDUs to more socially accepted populations such as mothers and children, a practice that Strathdee et al suggest should be challenged (Strathdee et al., 2012).
Factors associated with injecting-related risk behaviors among people who inject drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis study
Published in Journal of Addictive Diseases, 2020
Omid Rezaei, Hesam Ghiasvand, Peter Higgs, Alireza Noroozi, Mehdi Noroozi, Fatemeh Rezaei, Bahram Armoon, Azadeh Bayani
Increasing awareness of the factors associated with borrowing and lending of already used needles, syringes or other injecting paraphernalia are important for policy-making and public health planning purposes.20 While previous systematic reviews on the effectiveness of sterile needle and syringe programs21 have shown them to be one of the best ways to reduce BBV transmission,21–25 there has yet to be a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the factors associated with borrowing and lending of used syringes among PWID. This study differs from prior studies in three important respects. First, we have included data from studies published between 1987 and 2018, thereby updating previous reviews24,26 by over 15 years. In Ksobiech’s study24 the focus was on associations between needle syringe program27 attendance and reductions in needle sharing-related risk behaviors. They found that needle and syringe programmes (NSPs) reduced risk behaviors of PWID including the borrowing and lending of already used injecting equipment.
Prevalence of skin and soft tissue infections and its related high-risk behaviors among people who inject drugs: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in Journal of Substance Use, 2019
Mohammad Moradi-Joo, Hesam Ghiasvand, Mehdi Noroozi, Bahram Armoon, Alireza Noroozi, Mahmood Karimy, Ali Rostami, Mohammad Saeed Mirzaee, Morteza Hemmat
Additional inclusion criteria for the secondary review were considered: any PWID, any age group (population), PWIDs who had received Needle and syringe programmes (NSP) (intervention), subjects who did not receive NSP (comparison group), studies that reported SSTIs among PWIDs (outcomes), and any types of research (cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control). On the other hand, qualitative studies, Meta-analysis, systematic reviews, and secondary studies were excluded. Studies published in any language except English were excluded as well. A senior researcher (M.N.) reviewed and adjudicated studies with discordant decisions from the reviewers.