首页> 外文期刊>Harm Reduction Journal >The acceptability and feasibility of a brief psychosocial intervention to reduce blood-borne virus risk behaviours among people who inject drugs: a randomised control feasibility trial of a psychosocial intervention (the PROTECT study) versus treatment as usual
【24h】

The acceptability and feasibility of a brief psychosocial intervention to reduce blood-borne virus risk behaviours among people who inject drugs: a randomised control feasibility trial of a psychosocial intervention (the PROTECT study) versus treatment as usual

机译:简短的社会心理干预措施以减少注射毒品者血液传播病毒风险行为的可接受性和可行性:心理社会干预措施的随机对照可行性试验(PROTECT研究)与常规治疗的比较

获取原文
       

摘要

Background While opiate substitution therapy and injecting equipment provision (IEP) have reduced blood-borne viruses (BBV) among people who inject drugs (PWID), some PWID continue to share injecting equipment and acquire BBV. Psychosocial interventions that address risk behaviours could reduce BBV transmission among PWID. Methods A pragmatic, two-armed randomised controlled, open feasibility study of PWID attending drug treatment or IEP in four UK regions. Ninety-nine PWID were randomly allocated to receive a three-session manualised psychosocial group intervention and BBV transmission information booklet plus treatment as usual (TAU) ( n =?52) or information booklet plus TAU ( n =?47). The intervention was developed from evidence-based literature, qualitative interviews with PWID, key stakeholder consultations, and expert opinion. Recruitment rates, retention in treatment, follow-up completion rates and health economic data completion measured feasibility. Results Fifty-six percent (99/176) of eligible PWID were recruited. More participants attended at least one intervention session in London (10/16; 63%) and North Wales (7/13; 54%) than in Glasgow (3/12; 25%) and York (0/11). Participants who attended no sessions ( n =?32) compared to those attending at least one ( n =?20) session were more likely to be homeless (56 vs 25%, p =?0.044), injected drugs for a greater number of days (median 25 vs 6.5, p =?0.019) and used a greater number of needles from an IEP in the last month (median 31 vs 20, p =?0.056). No adverse events were reported. 45.5% (45/99) were followed up 1?month post-intervention. Feedback forms confirmed that the intervention was acceptable to both intervention facilitators and participants who attended it. Follow-up attendance was associated with fewer days of injecting in the last month (median 14 vs 27, p =?0.030) and fewer injections of cocaine (13 vs 30%, p =?0.063). Analysis of the questionnaires identified several service use questionnaire categories that could be excluded from the assessment battery in a full-randomised controlled trial. Conclusions Findings should be interpreted with caution due to small sample sizes. A future definitive RCT of the psychosocial intervention is not feasible. The complex needs of some PWID may have limited their engagement in the intervention. More flexible delivery methods may have greater reach. Trial registration ISRCTN66453696
机译:背景技术尽管鸦片替代疗法和注射设备供应(IEP)减少了注射毒品(PWID)人群中的血传播病毒(BBV),但一些PWID仍在继续共享注射设备并获得BBV。解决风险行为的社会心理干预措施可以减少BBV在PWID之间的传播。方法对英国四个地区进行药物治疗或IEP的PWID进行实用,两臂随机对照的开放可行性研究。随机分配99个PWID,以接受三阶段的手动社会心理干预和BBV传播信息手册加照常治疗(TAU)(n =?52)或信息手册加TAU(n =?47)。干预措施是从基于证据的文献,对PWID的定性访谈,主要利益相关者咨询和专家意见中发展而来的。招聘率,治疗保留率,随访完成率和卫生经济数据完成情况衡量了可行性。结果招募了百分之56(99/176)的合格PWID。在伦敦(10/16; 63%)和北威尔士(7/13; 54%)参加至少一次干预会议的参与者比在格拉斯哥(3/12; 25%)和约克(0/11)的参加者多。与未参加至少一届会议(n =?20)的参与者相比,未参加会议的参与者(n =?32)更有可能无家可归(56 vs 25%,p =?0.044),注射毒品的人数更多天(中位数25 vs 6.5,p =?0.019),并在上个月使用了更多的IEP针头(中位数31 vs 20,p =?0.056)。没有不良反应的报道。干预后1个月,随访了45.5%(45/99)。反馈表确认该干预措施对参与干预的干预者和参与者都是可以接受的。上个月的随访时间与注射的天数减少有关(中位数14比27,p =?0.030)和可卡因注射较少(13 vs 30%,p =?0.063)。对问卷的分析确定了几种服务使用问卷类别,这些类别可以在完全随机对照试验中从评估组中排除。结论由于样本量较小,应谨慎解释研究结果。心理社会干预的未来确定性RCT是不可行的。一些PWID的复杂需求可能会限制他们参与干预。更加灵活的交付方式可能会影响更大。试用注册ISRCTN66453696

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号