Not in the vein: 'missed hits', subcutaneous and intramuscular injections and associated harms among people who inject psychoactive drugs in Bristol, United Kingdom

Background: The extent of intentional or accidental subcutaneous and intramuscular injections and the factors associated with these have rarely been studied among people who inject drugs, yet these may play an important role in the acquisition bacterial infections. This study describes the extent of these, and in particular the factors and harms associated with accidental subcutaneous and intramuscular injections (i.e. ‘missed hits’). Methods: People who inject drugs were recruited using respondent driven sampling. Weighted data was examined using bivariate analyses and logistic regression. Results: The participants mean age was 33 years (31% aged under 30-years), 28% were women, and the mean time since first injection was 12 years (N = 329). During the preceding three months, 97% had injected heroin, 71% crack-cocaine, and 16% amphetamines; 36% injected daily. Overall, 99% (325) reported that they aimed to inject intravenously; only three aimed to inject subcutaneously and one intramuscularly. Of those that aimed to inject intravenously, 56% (181) reported ever missing a vein (for 51 this occurred more than four times month on average). Factors associated with ‘missed hits’ suggested that these were the consequence of poor vascular access, injection technique and/or hygiene. ‘Missed hits’ were twice as common among those reporting sores/open wounds, abscesses, or redness, swelling and tenderness at injection sites. Conclusion: Intentional subcutaneous and intramuscular injections are rare in this sample. ‘Missed hits’ are common and appear to be associated with poor injection practice. Interventions are required to reduce risk through improving injecting practice and hygiene

The nexus of immigration regulation and health governance: a scoping review of the extent to which right to access healthcare by migrants, refugees and asylum seekers was upheld in the United Kingdom during COVID-19

Objectives Complementing the well-established evidence base on health inequalities experienced by migrants, refugees and asylum seekers in the UK; we examined the extent to which their right to equal non-discriminatory access to health services (promotive, preventive, curative) was upheld during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study design Arksey and O′Malley's scoping review framework. Methods A comprehensive search was conducted on Medline, PubMed, and CINAHL using detailed MESH terms, for literature published between 01 January 2020 and 01 January 2024. The process was supported by a ten-page Google search and hand searching of reference lists. 42 records meeting the inclusion criteria were charted, coded inductively and analysed thematically in an integrated team-based approach. Results Dissonance between immigration regulation and health governance is illustrated in four themes: Health systems leveraged to (re)enforce the hostile environment; Dissonance between health rights on paper and in practice; Structural failures to overcome communication and digital exclusion; and COVID-19 vaccine (in)equity exacerbated fear, mistrust and exclusion. Migrants, refugees and asylum seekers encountered substantial individual, structural and policy-level barriers to accessing healthcare in the UK during COVID-19. Insecure immigration status, institutional mistrust, data-sharing and charging fears, communication challenges and digital exclusion impacted heavily on their ability to access healthcare in an equitable non-discriminatory manner. Conclusions An inclusive and innovative health equity and rights-based responses reaching all migrants, refugees and asylum seekers are warranted if the National Health Service is to live up to its promise of ‘leaving no one behind’ in post-pandemic and future responses

Going into the groin: Injection into the femoral vein among people who inject drugs in three urban areas of England

Background: There have been increasing concerns about injection into the femoral vein – groin injecting – among people who inject drugs in a number of countries, though most studies have been small. The extent, reasons and harms associated with groin injecting are examined. Method: Participants were recruited using respondent driven sampling (2006–2009). Weighted data was examined using bivariate analyses and logistic regression. Results: The mean age was 32 years; 25% were women (N = 855). During the preceding 28 days, 94% had injected heroin and 13% shared needles/syringes. Overall, 53% reported ever groin injecting, with 9.8% first doing so at the same age as starting to inject. Common reasons given for groin injecting included: “Can’t get a vein elsewhere” (68%); “It is discreet” (18%); and “It is quicker” (14%). During the preceding 28 days, 41% had groin injected, for 77% this was the only body area used (for these “It is discreet” was more frequently given as a reason). In the multivariable analysis, groin injection was associated with: swabbing injection sites; saving filters for reuse; and receiving opiate substitution therapy. It was less common among those injecting into two body areas, and when other people (rather than services) were the main source of needles. Groin injection was more common among those with hepatitis C and reporting ever having deep vein thrombosis or septicaemia. Conclusions: Groin injection was common, often due to poor vascular access, but for some it was out of choice. Interventions are required to reduce injecting risk and this practice

Modelling HIV in the injecting drug user population and the male homosexual population in a developed country context

In many high income countries men who have sex with men (MSM) and injecting drug users (IDUs) are the two groups with the highest HIV prevalence. Yet these two groups are not mutually exclusive, and those MSM who are also IDUs (MSM–IDUs) may be particularly vulnerable to HIV infection. This may be particularly relevant to the IDU population in countries, like the UK, with a much lower HIV prevalence amongst IDUs than MSM, as the MSM–IDUs could provide a route of HIV infection into the IDU population. In this research two alternative modelling approaches that describe the transmission dynamics of HIV within the IDU, MSM, and heterosexual populations are proposed. These models are constructed with two aims. The first is to investigate the possible impact of interventions that target HIV transmission in the MSM and IDU populations, and the second aim is to investigate the impact of the model structure on the model results. An examination of the assortativity of mixing between risk groups is also undertaken. The models are parameterised for England and Wales. While the MSM–IDU population is small, targeting MSM–IDUs was the most efficient intervention strategy in terms of cases averted per 100 individuals targeted with the intervention. Sensitivity analysis showed that variations in the assumed assortativity of mixing between the population groups in both models have a large impact on model results. This means that to generate quantitatively robust estimates for the impact of different intervention strategies it will be necessary to obtain estimates for assortativity values through empirical work