Premium
Can drug injectors be encouraged to adopt non‐injecting routes of administration (NIROA) for drugs?
Author(s) -
DOLAN KATE,
CLEMENT NICOLE,
ROUEN DAVID,
REES VAUGHAN,
SHEARER JAMES,
WODAK ALEX
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
drug and alcohol review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.018
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1465-3362
pISSN - 0959-5236
DOI - 10.1080/09595230412331289437
Subject(s) - medicine , drug , intervention (counseling) , drug administration , dosing , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) , drug injection , pharmacology , family medicine , psychiatry
Drug use by injection can cause problems specific to this form of administration. Problems include an increased risk of drug overdose, drug dependence, the transmission of HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C and vein damage. Shifting drug injectors from injecting to another route of administration may minimize these problems. The aims of the study were to develop and trial an intervention to assist willing injecting drug users (IDUs) to shift to non‐injecting routes of administration (NIROA) and to explore the acceptability and practicality of facilitating NIROA. IDUs were assessed and suitable subjects entered a cognitive behavioural trial consisting of five 1‐hour sessions of individual therapy with a registered psychologist. Forty‐two subjects were assessed (22 males and 20 females). Thirty subjects entered treatment. The mean age was 36 years. Twenty‐one subjects were followed‐up at 3 months and 10 subjects at 6 months. At 3 and 6 months, the proportion of subjects who had commenced using NIROA was 30% and 50%, respectively. This pilot study showed that it was possible to assist a minority of drug injectors to move from injecting to the non‐injecting administration of drugs. However, many of these appeared to be already motivated to cease using drugs and adopting NIROA was one way of assisting this. Poor follow‐up rate, lack of control group, questions about cost‐effectiveness and the impact of market factors which possibly constrain shifting to NIROA suggest that further research is needed before it could be said that NIROA should be recommended as a viable harm reduction strategy in the Australian context.