122 research outputs found
Impact of a treatment as prevention strategy on hepatitis C virus transmission and on morbidity in people who inject drugs
Background: Highly effective direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens (90%
efficacy) are becoming available for hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment. This
therapeutic revolution leads us to consider possibility of eradicating the
virus. However, for this, an effective cascade of care is required. Methods: In
the context of the incoming DAAs, we used a dynamic individual-based model
including a model of the people who inject drugs (PWID) social network to
simulate the impact of improved testing, linkage to care, and adherence to
treatment, and of modified treatment recommendation on the transmission and on
the morbidity of HCV in PWID in France. Results: Under the current incidence
and cascade of care, with treatment initiated at fibrosis stage F2, the
HCV prevalence decreased from 42.8% to 24.9% [95% confidence interval
24.8%--24.9%] after 10 years. Changing treatment initiation criteria to treat
from F0 was the only intervention leading to a substantial additional decrease
in the prevalence, which fell to 11.6% [11.6%--11.7%] at 10 years. Combining
this change with improved testing, linkage to care, and adherence to treatment
decreased HCV prevalence to 7% [7%--7.1%] at 10 years and avoided 15.3%
[14.0%-16.6%] and 29.0% [27.9%--30.1%] of cirrhosis complications over 10 and
40 years respectively. Conclusion: A high decrease in viral transmission occurs
only when treatment is initiated before liver disease progresses to severe
stages, suggesting that systematic treatment in PWID, where incidence remains
high, would be beneficial. However, eradication will be difficult to achieve
Dynamic modelling of hepatitis C virus transmission among people who inject drugs: a methodological review
Equipment sharing among people who inject drugs (PWID) is a key risk factor
in infection by hepatitis C virus (HCV). Both the effectiveness and
cost-effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing HCV transmission in this
population (such as opioid substitution therapy, needle exchange programs or
improved treatment) are difficult to evaluate using field surveys. Ethical
issues and complicated access to the PWID population make it difficult to
gather epidemiological data. In this context, mathematical modelling of HCV
transmission is a useful alternative for comparing the cost and effectiveness
of various interventions. Several models have been developed in the past few
years. They are often based on strong hypotheses concerning the population
structure. This review presents compartmental and individual-based models in
order to underline their strengths and limits in the context of HCV infection
among PWID. The final section discusses the main results of the papers
Recommended from our members
A cultural and political difference: comparing the racial and social framing of population crack cocaine use between the United States and France
Crack cocaine refers to a derivative of powder cocaine. Nonetheless, the usage of the term âcrack cocaineâ is loaded with unfortunate connotations of stigma and discrimination. When comparing the framing of crack cocaine use between the United States (U.S.) and France, the respective cultural and sociopolitical settings need to be accounted for.
In the U.S., crack cocaine refers to a smokable variety of cocaine which is considered to be more affordable and accessible than powder cocaine [1]. In the 1980s and 90 s, the U.S. response to crack cocaine was driven by media depictions of an urban, public health crisis primarily affecting black communities in American cities. This media depiction drove U.S. drug policy and shaped both political debate and public attitude towards crack cocaine [1, 2]. The subsequent influx of drug education messages, public service announcements, and curriculums that were created in response to crack cocaine were pervaded by the public and political fear that crack cocaine was destroying a generation of young Americans [3]. The U.S. government response at this time focused on managing the perceived crack cocaine epidemic by criminalizing rather than providing treatment facilities or healthcare services for people who use crack cocaine. In fact, the 1988 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse showed that the sharpest rise in cocaine and crack cocaine use since the inception of the survey in the early 1970s, rapidly outpaced the availability of treatment programs and efforts to expand treatment facilities in metropolitan areas such as New York City [4].
The French approach to crack cocaine shares commonalities and differences with the U.S. In France, crack cocaine is mostly smoked but more recently is also being injected intravenously and the spike of increased crack cocaine use in France did not occur until the 2000s [5, 6]. French political and media attention towards crack cocaine has also recently increased due to the presence of visible, open drug use in Paris framing the topic as a public order, health, and social problem. This attention stems from crack cocaine in France having increasing associations with socially and economically vulnerable populations when compared to powder cocaine use patterns [6]. Unlike the U.S., the aggregation of racial data is prohibited in France. And as a result, the French understanding of the current rise in crack cocaine use does not clearly analyze the issue along racial lines but rather considers low socioeconomic populations to be drivers of the recent increase in crack cocaine use [5]. Since the late 1970s, in addition to a repressive drug policy approach, France has implemented a strong, publicly funded drug treatment system with harm reduction services to better address the health needs of people who use drugs [7]. Accordingly, France is systematically more equipped to serve the healthcare needs of people who problematically use crack cocaine compared to the U.S. [5, 6]
Distributive sharing among HIV-HCV co-infected injecting drug users: the preventive role of trust in one's physician
International audienceThis study, based on data from the MANIF 2000 cohort study, investigates the relationship between the lending of injecting equipment, drug use and experience with HIV care. The sample comprised 224 HIV-HCV-coinfected patients who reported having injected drugs in the previous 6 months and their 538 visits to clinical services. Longitudinal data were collected for medical status, and self-reported risk behaviors. A logistic regression GEE model was used to identify correlates of distributive sharing. After multiple adjustment, patients who reported trust in physicians were significantly less likely to report lending injection equipment while cocaine users were at increased risk. Promoting dialogue between physicians and IDUs may play an important role in HIV-HCV positive prevention
The fast and furious
Cocaine and amphetamines (âstimulantsâ) are distinct central nervous system stimulants with similar effects (Pleuvry, 2009; Holman, 1994). Cocaine is a crystalline tropane alkaloid extracted from coca leaves. Amphetamines are a subclass of phenylethylamines with primarily stimulant effects, including amphetamine, methamphetamine, methcathinone and cathinone and referred to as âamphetaminesâ in this review (Holman, 1994). MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxy-N-methamphetamine or ecstasy) is a substituted amphetamine known for its entactogenic, psychedelic, and stimulant effects (Morgan, 2000). Stimulants can produce increased wakefulness, focus and confidence, elevated mood, feelings of power, and decreased fatigue and appetite; stimulants also produce nervousness or anxiety and, in some cases, psychosis and suicidal thoughts (Holman, 1994; EMCDDA, 2007f; Hildrey et al., 2009; Pates and Riley, 2009). Although there is little evidence that stimulants cause physical dependence, tolerance may develop upon repetitive use and withdrawal may cause discomfort and depression (EMCDDA, 2007f; Pates and Riley, 2009). Users may engage in âcoke or speed bingesâ alternated with periods of withdrawal and abstinence (Beek et al., 2001)
'My first 48Â hours out' : drug usersâ perspectives on challenges and strategies upon release from prison
Background Prisoners report much higher prevalence rates of drug use and more harmful consumption patterns than the general population. People who use drugs have above-average experiences with the criminal justice system in general, and the prison system and subsequent release situations in particular. Release from prison is associated with increased mortality rates among drug users due to the risk of overdose. The EU-funded project 'My first 48 hours out' aimed to address the gaps in continuity of care for long-term drug users in prison and upon release, with a special focus on drug user's perspectives on needs and challenges upon release. Methods A multi-country (Belgium, France, Germany and Portugal) qualitative study was set up to explore drug users' perceptions of drug use and risk behaviour upon prison release, experiences of incarceration and release, and strategies to avoid risks when being released. In total, 104 prisoners and recently released persons with a history of drug use participated in semi-structured interviews and focus groups discussions on these topics. Results Respondents pointed out that there are numerous challenges for people who use drugs when released from prison. Lack of stable housing and employment support were frequently mentioned, as well as complex administrative procedures regarding access to services, health insurance and welfare benefits. Besides structural challenges, individual issues may challenge social reintegration like 'old habits', mental health problems and disrupted social networks. As a result, (ex-)prisoners adopt individual strategies to cope with the risks and challenges at release. Conclusion Measures to prepare prisoners for release often do not focus on the individual and specific challenges of persons who use drugs. Psychosocial and medical support need to be improved and adjusted to drug users' needs inside and outside prison. To improve the quality and continuity of care around release, the perspectives and coping strategies of people who use drugs should be used to better address their needs and barriers to treatment
Insufficient access to harm reduction measures in prisons in 5 countries (PRIDE Europe): a shared European public health concern
Background: Prisoners constitute a high-risk population, particularly for infectious diseases. The aim of this study was to estimate the level of infectious risk in the prisons of five different European countries by measuring to what extent the prison system adheres to WHO/UNODC recommendations.
Methods: Following the methodology used in a previous French survey, a postal/electronic questionnaire was sent to all prisons in Austria, Belgium, Denmark and Italy to collect data on the availability of several recommended HIV-HCV prevention interventions and HBV vaccination for prisoners. A score was built to compare adherence to WHO/UNODC recommendations (considered a proxy of environmental infectious risk) in those 4 countries. It ranged from 0 (no adherence) to 12 (full adherence). A second score (0 to 9) was built to include data from a previous French survey, thereby creating a 5-country comparison.
Results: A majority of prisons answered in Austria (100 %), France (66 %) and Denmark (58 %), half in Belgium (50 %) and few in Italy (17 %), representing 100, 74, 89, 47 and 23 % coverage of the prison populations, respectively. Availability of prevention measures was low, with median adherence scores ranging from 3.5 to 4.5 at the national level. These results were confirmed when using the second score which included France in the inter-country comparison. Overall, the adherence score was inversely associated with prison overpopulation rates (p = 0.08).
Conclusions: Using a score of adherence to WHO/UNODC recommendations, the estimated environmental infectious risk remains extremely high in the prisons of the 5 European countries assessed. Public health strategies should be adjusted to comply with the principle of equivalence of care and prevention with the general community
Recommended from our members
Rethinking urban-rural designations in public health surveillance of the overdose crisis and crafting an agenda for future monitoring
Rurality has served as a key concept in popular and scientific understandings of the US overdose crisis, with White, rural, and low-income areas thought to be most heavily affected. However, we observe that overdose trends have risen nearly uniformly across the urban-rural designations employed in most research, implying that their importance has likely been overstated or incorrectly conceptualized. Nevertheless, urbanicity/rurality does serve as a key axis to understand inequalities in overdose mortality when assessed with more nuanced modalities-employing a more granular analysis of geography at the sub-county level, and intersecting rurality sociodemographic indices such as race/ethnicity. Using national overdose data from 1999-2021, we illustrate the intersectional importance of rurality for overdose surveillance. Finally, we offer recommendations for integrating these insights into drug overdose surveillance moving forward
The Harms of Constructing Addiction as a Chronic, Relapsing Brain Disease.
As an international network of historians and social scientists who study approaches to the management of drugs across time and place, we have noticed the effort to redefine addiction as a chronic, relapsing brain disease (CRBD). The CRBD model is promoted as a route to destigmatize addiction and to empower individuals to access treatment that works within that modelâs terms.1 CRBD usefully recognizes that brain-based neural adaptations place individual brains in chronic states of readiness to relapse. But brains are housed inside of people. Substance use is biological, social, and political; our concepts and approaches to complex questions surrounding substance use must be, too.2,3 By overlooking the sociopolitical dynamics and inequalities bound up with substance use, the CRBD model can paradoxically further marginalize people who use drugs by positing them as neurobiologically incapable of agency or choice. We are concerned that the CRBD model paints drug users as individuals whose exclusion from social, economic, and political participation is justified by their biological flaws and damaged brains
- âŠ