147 research outputs found

    “I Felt Like a Superhero”: The Experience of Responding to Drug Overdose Among Individuals Trained in Overdose Prevention

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Overdose prevention programs (OPPs) train people who inject drugs and other community members to prevent, recognise and respond to opioid overdose. However, little is known about the experience of taking up the role of an overdose responder for the participants. METHODS: We present findings from qualitative interviews with 30 participants from two OPPs in Los Angeles, CA, USA from 2010 to 2011 who had responded to at least one overdose since being trained in overdose prevention and response. RESULTS: Being trained by an OPP and responding to overdoses had both positive and negative effects for trained responders . Positive effects include an increased sense of control and confidence, feelings of heroism and pride, and a recognition and appreciation of one\u27s expertise. Negative effects include a sense of burden, regret, fear, and anger, which sometimes led to cutting social ties, but might also be mitigated by the increased empowerment associated with the positive effects. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that becoming an overdose responder can involve taking up a new social role that has positive effects, but also confers some stress that may require additional support. OPPs should provide flexible opportunities for social support to individuals making the transition to this new and critical social role. Equipping individuals with the skills, technology, and support they need to respond to drug overdose has the potential to confer both individual and community-wide benefits

    Low-Frequency Heroin Injection among Out-of-Treatment, Street-Recruited Injection Drug Users

    Get PDF
    In this paper, we explore the understudied phenomenon of "low-frequency" heroin injection in a sample of street-recruited heroin injectors not in drug treatment. We conducted a cross-sectional study of 2,410 active injection drug users (IDUs) recruited in San Francisco, California from 2000 to 2005. We compare the sociodemographic characteristics and injection risk behaviors of low-frequency heroin injectors (low-FHI; one to 10 self-reported heroin injections in the past 30 days) to high-frequency heroin injectors (high-FHI; 30 or more self-reported heroin injections in the past 30 days). Fifteen percent of the sample met criteria for low-FHI. African American race, men who have sex with men (MSM) behavior, and injection and noninjection methamphetamine use were independently associated with low-FHI. Compared to high-FHI, low-FHI were less likely to report syringe sharing and nonfatal heroin overdose. A small but significant proportion of heroin injectors inject heroin 10 or less times per month. Additional research is needed to qualitatively examine low-frequency heroin injection and its relationship to drug use trajectories

    Comparing Respondent-Driven Sampling and Targeted Sampling Methods of Recruiting Injection Drug Users in San Francisco

    Get PDF
    The objective of this article is to compare demographic characteristics, risk behaviors, and service utilization among injection drug users (IDUs) recruited from two separate studies in San Francisco in 2005, one which used targeted sampling (TS) and the other which used respondent-driven sampling (RDS). IDUs were recruited using TS (n = 651) and RDS (n = 534) and participated in quantitative interviews that included demographic characteristics, risk behaviors, and service utilization. Prevalence estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess whether there were differences in these variables by sampling method. There was overlap in 95% CIs for all demographic variables except African American race (TS: 45%, 53%; RDS: 29%, 44%). Maps showed that the proportion of IDUs distributed across zip codes were similar for the TS and RDS sample, with the exception of a single zip code that was more represented in the TS sample. This zip code includes an isolated, predominantly African American neighborhood where only the TS study had a field site. Risk behavior estimates were similar for both TS and RDS samples, although self-reported hepatitis C infection was lower in the RDS sample. In terms of service utilization, more IDUs in the RDS sample reported no recent use of drug treatment and syringe exchange program services. Our study suggests that perhaps a hybrid sampling plan is best suited for recruiting IDUs in San Francisco, whereby the more intensive ethnographic and secondary analysis components of TS would aid in the planning of seed placement and field locations for RDS

    Oregon's Measure 110: Principles and Metrics for Effective Evaluation

    Get PDF
    In November 2020, Oregon voters passed an historic measure to decriminalize possession of small amounts of all drugs and invest substantially in healthcare, substance use disorder treatment, and harm reduction and social services for people who use drugs. Already several jurisdictions across the U.S. are looking to replicate and improve upon Measure 110 (M110 also known as the Drug Addiction Treatment and Recovery Act of 2020), and there is broad interest in evaluating the impact of the measure. Too often, however, researchers neglect to consult with people on the ground who are directly impacted by policy changes when they craft their evaluations. The failure to do so can lead to evaluations that ask the wrong questions, do not answer questions of interest to the community, or fail to take into account significant confounding variables and complexities that can affect outcomes. In addition, some evaluators focus on outcome measures but never look at how the implementation of a policy (or the failure to implement it fully) impacts those outcomes. High quality evaluations will address how M110 is being operationalized, outcomes linked to those activities, and how the broader context may or may not affect those outcomes. To encourage thoughtful policy evaluations, we describe how M110 changes existing laws related to unregulated substances, and then provide evaluation principles and candidate metrics derived from interviews with people who use drugs (PWUD) in Oregon and our working group

    Principles and Metrics for Evaluating Oregon’s Drug Decriminalization Measure: Centering the Voices of People Who Use Drugs

    Get PDF
    Objective: To develop principles for how to evaluate Measure 110 and a set of meaningful metrics for effectively determining the outcomes of Measure 11

    Reinterpreting Ethnic Patterns among White and African American Men Who Inject Heroin: A Social Science of Medicine Approach

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Street-based heroin injectors represent an especially vulnerable population group subject to negative health outcomes and social stigma. Effective clinical treatment and public health intervention for this population requires an understanding of their cultural environment and experiences. Social science theory and methods offer tools to understand the reasons for economic and ethnic disparities that cause individual suffering and stress at the institutional level. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used a cross-methodological approach that incorporated quantitative, clinical, and ethnographic data collected by two contemporaneous long-term San Francisco studies, one epidemiological and one ethnographic, to explore the impact of ethnicity on street-based heroin-injecting men 45 years of age or older who were self-identified as either African American or white. We triangulated our ethnographic findings by statistically examining 14 relevant epidemiological variables stratified by median age and ethnicity. We observed significant differences in social practices between self-identified African Americans and whites in our ethnographic social network sample with respect to patterns of (1) drug consumption; (2) income generation; (3) social and institutional relationships; and (4) personal health and hygiene. African Americans and whites tended to experience different structural relationships to their shared condition of addiction and poverty. Specifically, this generation of San Francisco injectors grew up as the children of poor rural to urban immigrants in an era (the late 1960s through 1970s) when industrial jobs disappeared and heroin became fashionable. This was also when violent segregated inner city youth gangs proliferated and the federal government initiated its “War on Drugs.” African Americans had earlier and more negative contact with law enforcement but maintained long-term ties with their extended families. Most of the whites were expelled from their families when they began engaging in drug-related crime. These historical-structural conditions generated distinct presentations of self. Whites styled themselves as outcasts, defeated by addiction. They professed to be injecting heroin to stave off “dopesickness” rather than to seek pleasure. African Americans, in contrast, cast their physical addiction as an oppositional pursuit of autonomy and pleasure. They considered themselves to be professional outlaws and rejected any appearance of abjection. Many, but not all, of these ethnographic findings were corroborated by our epidemiological data, highlighting the variability of behaviors within ethnic categories. CONCLUSIONS: Bringing quantitative and qualitative methodologies and perspectives into a collaborative dialog among cross-disciplinary researchers highlights the fact that clinical practice must go beyond simple racial or cultural categories. A clinical social science approach provides insights into how sociocultural processes are mediated by historically rooted and institutionally enforced power relations. Recognizing the logical underpinnings of ethnically specific behavioral patterns of street-based injectors is the foundation for cultural competence and for successful clinical relationships. It reduces the risk of suboptimal medical care for an exceptionally vulnerable and challenging patient population. Social science approaches can also help explain larger-scale patterns of health disparities; inform new approaches to structural and institutional-level public health initiatives; and enable clinicians to take more leadership in changing public policies that have negative health consequences
    • 

    corecore