Specific Population groups Flashcards
The Illicit Drug Reporting system (IDRS)
National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre
Australia’s central monitoring and early warning system which identifies key and emerging trends among injecting drug users
It comprises:
nearly 1,000 interviews with injecting drug users across Australia
interviews with key experts who work in the drug and alcohol sector.
incorporates analysis of other national data related to illicit drug use in Australia.
Key findings of the IDRS 2016
Australia’s injecting drug users are getting older
Average age of first injection was age 20
Poly drug use was high - varied markedly across states.
Nearly two thirds of Australia’s injecting drug users inject some form of methamphetamine (lowered frequently)
Morphine was the most commonly used prescription opioid; the majority of that obtained illicitly. Recent oxycodone was high
Methamphetamine and cannabis (daily) were the most commonly used drugs alongside heroin.
Key findings of IDRS 2016
80% unemployed
Half of all survey participants are receiving opioid substitution treatment
56% reported high, or very high psychological distress compared (v 10%)
85 per cent had visited their GP in the past year (8x)
Nearly one in five have overdosed in the past year
Social factors predicting risky injecting practices
Social factors: predicting risky injecting practices depression suicide attempts non-consensual sex unstable housing low education
Injecting drug use is a behaviour strongly associated with other highly marginalised characteristics such as:
Imprisonment
blood borne virus infections
homelessness and
mental illness.
Multiple harms include:
Blood borne virus Overdose Physical health (including vein care etc) Mental health Psychosocial (relationships, law etc)
HCV
In developed countries, the majority of new infections attributed to injecting drug use
Australia: 90%
UK: >90%
USA: 54%
Globally, the prevalence of hepatitis C infection among people who inject drugs is estimated to be estimated at 10 million people
Australian NSP National Data Survey Report
Australian NSP National Data Survey Report 2008-12 Prevalence of HIV, HCV, and injecting and sexual behaviour among NSP attendees
HCV antibody prevalence declined significantly over the period, from 62% - 53% (2012), evident for men (63% - 52%) and women (61% - 54%).
HCV antibody prevalence was highest among:
35 years and over and
those who first initiated injecting drugs more than ten years
-The prevalence generally increases with longer duration of injecting drug use for both males and females.
60% NSP; 2% general population
Females tested positive more frequently than males, particularly among those injecting < 3 years (48% and 23%, respectively).
Hepatitis B:
prevalence higher for long-term injecting drug users
<0.5% of injecting drug users with an injecting history <5 years
14% of users with a history of 10+ years
HIV prevalence IVDU
National prevalence < 5%
1253 new infections in 2012 (10% rise)
28,600 - 34,300 Australians diagnosed with HIV
Many people living with HIV unaware of status
The Kirby Institute. HIV, viral hepatitis and sexually transmissible infections in Australia Annual Surveillance Report 2013. The Kirby Institute, The University of New South Wales
HIV antibody prevalence
Australian NSP National Data Survey Report 2008-12 Prevalence of HIV, HCV, and injecting and sexual behaviour among NSP attendees
HIV antibody prevalence:
Remained low at 1.5% or less nationally and at 3% or less in all state and territories.
Among men, HIV prevalence declined from 2.1% - 1.2%
Among women HIV prevalence increased from 0.4% - 1.3%
Interventions: IVDU
Psychoeducation Risk taking (injecting, sex, intoxication) Safer injecting Vein care Overdose Community safety/disposal Access to NSP Brief interventions Replacement programs Regular testing – prevention and early treatment General health / well being Peer interventions
“Course, severity and treatment of substance abuse among women verus men”…
Retrospective data analysis: 642 patients (43% women) from university medical program a&d programs (USA)
Data: demographics, family history, patterns of use++, periods of abstinence, current diagnosis
Comparisons were made between women and men
Women were
Results: Women were…
More likely to be “homemakers” (unemployed)
More likely to have a substance-abusing spouse (if married)
Less likely to have legal problems associated with substance misuse
Less likely to report lifetime use of inhalants or hallucinogens
Less likely to be cannabis-dependent
More likely to have used substances for fewer years (shorter time period)
Women reported
Women reported…
Fewer admissions for treatment
Fewer treatment days (when admitted)
Lower overall treatment costs Implications regarding a “male-orientated” treatment system
Consistent with previous research, women have:
A more rapid course (time frame) for developing substance problems
More commonly have a substance-abusing partner
Reduced treatment options/patterns
Gender differences: overview
Biological differences—women
Intoxication occurs with less alcohol intake
Metabolise alcohol differently
Develop cirrhosis of the liver more rapidly
Social differences—women
Increased stigma associated with use/misuse
More often caring for children
Cultural differences regarding status in society
Patterns of use—women
Develop problematic use more quickly
More use of prescription medications
More “private” use/misuse
Patterns of use—women
Develop problematic use more quickly
More use of prescription medications
More “private” use/misuse
Stigma and substance-using women
More stigma (Swift & Copeland, 1998; Simpson & McNulty, 2008)
Highest among pregnant women
Increased blame for difficulties (Banwell & Bammer, 2006)
Reluctant to seek treatment
Fear negative attitudes of health professionals (e.g., child safety)
Stereotypes and cultural aspects (Hahm et al., 2014)
Treatment: Barriers
Lack of awareness of range of treatment options
Stigma
Childcare
Perceived economic and time costs of residential treatment, including costs to family disruption
Lack of support
Concerns about type of treatment, especially confrontational approaches
Having to talk in groups with men present
Treatment: Barriers (cont’d)
Fear of children being removed from their care
Male-orientated treatment may not address issues of particular importance to women
Women who are survivors of abuse or in an abusive relationship with a male may feel unsafe in the company of men during treatment
Woman may experience sexual harassment in mixed-gender settings
Women may feel in the minority and less able to speak freely about their issues
Stats
Slower decline in smoking rates
Men: higher levels of risky and hazardous drinking
Similarities in levels of illicit drug use
Similarities in IVDU
Differences in frequencies and access
Less services and increased stigma