首页> 外文期刊>Addiction >Examination of the association between syringe exchange program (SEP) dispensation policy and SEP client-level syringe coverage among injection drug users.
【24h】

Examination of the association between syringe exchange program (SEP) dispensation policy and SEP client-level syringe coverage among injection drug users.

机译:检查注射吸毒者之间的注射器交换计划(SEP)分配政策与SEP客户级注射器覆盖率之间的关联。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AIM: To determine whether syringe exchange programs' (SEPs) dispensation policy is associated with syringe coverage among SEP clients. DESIGN: Cross-sectional samples of SEPs and their clients. SETTING: SEPs in California, USA. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four SEPs and their injection drug using (IDU) clients (n = 1576). MEASUREMENTS: Clients were classified as having adequate syringe coverage if they received at least as many syringes from the SEP as their self-reported injections in the last 30 days. SEPs were classified based on their syringe dispensation policy. Dispensation schemes ranging from least restrictive to most are: unlimited needs-based distribution; unlimited one-for-one exchange plus a few additional syringes; per visit limited one-for-one plus a few additional syringes; unlimited one-for-one exchange; and per visit limited one-for-one exchange. FINDINGS: Adequate syringe coverage among SEP clients by dispensation policy is as follows: unlimited needs-based distribution = 61%; unlimited one-for-one plus = 50%; limited one-for-one plus = 41%; unlimited one-for-one = 42%; and limited one-for-one = 26%. In multivariate analysis, adequate syringe coverage was significantly higher for all dispensation policies compared to per visit limited one-for-one exchange. Using propensity scoring methods, we compared syringe coverage by dispensation policies while controlling for client-level differences. Providing additional syringes above one-for-one exchange (50% versus 38%, P = 0.009) and unlimited exchange (42% versus 27%, P = 0.05) generally resulted in more clients having adequate syringe coverage compared to one-for-one exchange and per visit limits. CONCLUSION: Providing less restrictive syringe dispensation is associated with increased prevalence of adequate syringe coverage among clients. SEPs should adopt syringe dispensation policies that provide IDUs sufficient syringes to attain adequate syringe coverage.
机译:目的:确定注射器交换程序(SEP)的分配策略是否与SEP客户之间的注射器覆盖率相关联。设计:SEP及其客户的横截面样本。地点:美国加利福尼亚的SEP。参与者:24个SEP及其使用(IDU)客户的注射药物(n = 1576)。度量:如果客户在过去30天内从SEP收到的针筒数量至少等于其自我报告的针筒数量,则被认为具有足够的针筒覆盖率。 SEP根据其注射器分配政策进行分类。从最小限制到最大限制的分配方案是:基于需求的无限分配;无限一对一交换,外加几个注射器;每次探访仅限一对一,另加几个注射器;无限一对一交换;而且每次访问都只能进行一对一的交换。结果:根据分配政策,SEP客户中足够的注射器覆盖率如下:基于需求的无限制分配= 61%;无限一对一加= 50%;有限的一对一加= 41%;无限一对一= 42%;并限制一对一= 26%。在多变量分析中,与每次访问受限的一对一交换相比,所有配药策略的足够注射器覆盖率显着更高。使用倾向评分方法,我们在控制客户级别差异的同时,通过分配策略比较了注射器的覆盖率。与一对一交换相比,提供多于一对一交换(50%比38%,P = 0.009)和无限交换(42%对27%,P = 0.05)以上的额外注射器通常会导致更多的客户拥有足够的针筒覆盖率一次交换和每次访问限制。结论:减少注射器分配的限制会增加客户中适当注射器覆盖率的患病率。 SEP应采用注射器分配政策,为IDU提供足够的注射器以达到足够的注射器覆盖率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 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