Injecting drug use, risk behaviour and risk environment in Hungary: A qualitative analysis

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 353-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
József Rácz
1997 ◽  
Vol 170 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
José L. Ayuso-Mateos ◽  
Francisco Montañés ◽  
Ismael Lastra ◽  
Juan J. Picazo De La Garza ◽  
José L. Ayuso-Gutiérrez

BackgroundRecent surveys suggest that psychiatric patients are at increased risk of being infected with HIV, although very little information is available concerning the seroprevalence of HIV infection among this population outside the US. The aim of this study is to determine the seroprevalence of HIV-I among patients admitted to a psychiatric in-patient unit and to gather linked anonymous risk-factor information.MethodAn unlinked serosurvey was made, using HIV-1 antibody testing of remnant blood specimens collected for routine medical purposes, of patients consecutively admitted to an acute psychiatric unit in Madrid.ResultsBlood was obtained from 390 of the 477 eligible patients (81.8%). The prevalence of HIV was 5.1% (20/390). Patients aged between 18 and 39 accounted for 63.4% of the admissions and 75% of the positive results. Of the 29 patients who presented with injecting drug use, 14 were HIV-infected (48.3%; 95% CI 29.4 67.5). Of the 51 patients for whom any risk behaviour was noted on the admission chart, 18 were HIV-infected (35.3%; 95% CI 22.4 49.9).ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that there is a substantial prevalence of HIV infection in psychiatric patients admitted to an acute in-patient unit. History of injecting drug use was strongly associated with seropositivity. Clinicians recognised risk factors for HIV infection in the majority of the HIV-infected cases.


2004 ◽  
Vol 133 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. MATHEÏ ◽  
G. ROBAEYS ◽  
P. VAN DAMME ◽  
F. BUNTINX ◽  
R. VERRANDO

The prevalence of hepatitis C and related risk factors in drug users were compared in two geographic regions in Belgium, the city of Antwerp and the mixed urban–rural area of Limburg. All 310 participants were surveyed and screened for hepatitis B, hepatitis C and HIV. Prevalence rates of anti-HCV, anti-HBc and anti-HIV were 71, 62 and 4% in Antwerp and 46, 21 and 0% in Limburg respectively. Injecting drug use, duration of injecting drug use, work as a commercial sex-worker, originating from Turkey or Northern Africa, marginalization and anti-HBc positivity were identified as independent predictors for hepatitis C infection. In this study an important difference in HCV seroprevalence among drug users in a methadone maintenance programme across two geographic regions in Belgium was demonstrated. This was explained not only by variations in drug-related risk behaviour, but also by differences in sexual risk behaviour and socio-economic status.


2017 ◽  
Vol 62 (12) ◽  
pp. 3681-3707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shelley Walker ◽  
Peter Higgs ◽  
Mark Stoové ◽  
Mandy Wilson

This research focuses on an under-examined aspect of the post-release prison trajectory for a seldom-researched cohort. Narratives of the immediate days/weeks surrounding release were gathered from young men with histories of injecting drug use (IDU). Twenty-eight participants (aged 19-24) released from adult prisons in Victoria, Australia, participated in face-to-face in-depth qualitative interviews after release. Analysis of findings through the lens of a “risk environment” framework reveals how their experiences were compromised by risk factors embedded in the physical spaces and social situations they inhabited, as well as the multi-sectoral policy environments under which they were governed. A complex interplay between these factors, young men’s drug use and broader issues of structural vulnerability, including institutionalization and social disadvantage, combined to limit young men’s chances of “success”1 on the outside. Narratives provide evidence for interventions that transform risk environments into enabling environments, thereby promoting a more successful transition from prison to community for young men with IDU histories.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Dmitrieva ◽  
Vladimir Stepanov ◽  
Kateryna Svyrydova ◽  
Ievgeniia-Galyna Lukash ◽  
Svetlana Doltu ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction In 2007, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended for prison authorities to introduce prison needle and syringe programs (PNSP) if they have any evidence that injecting drug use is taking place in prisons. This article presents descriptive evidence that injecting drug use takes place in Ukrainian prisons, it discusses how (denial of) access to injection equipment is regulated in the current system and what changes should be considered in order to implement PNSP. Background Ukrainian prisons still live by the laws and policies adopted in the Soviet Union. Besides laws and regulations, these legacies are replicated through the organization and infrastructure of the prison’s physical space, and through “carceral collectivism” as a specific form of living and behaving. Inviolability of the prison order over time helps the prison staff to normalize and routinely rationalize punishment enforcement as a power “over” prisoners, but not a power “for” achieving a specific goal. Methods The Participatory Action Research approach was used as a way of involving different actors in the study’s working group and research process. The data were gathered through 160 semi-structured interviews with prison health care workers, guards, people who inject drugs (PWID) who served one or several terms and other informants. Results The “expertise” in drug use among prisoners demonstrated by prison staff tells us two things—they admit that injecting use takes place in prisons, and that the surveillance of prisoner behavior has been carried out constantly since the very beginning as a core function of control. The communal living conditions and prison collectivism may not only produce and reproduce a criminal subculture but, using the same mechanisms, produce and reproduce drug use in prison. The “political will” incorporated into prison laws and policies is essential for the revision of outdated legacies and making PNSP implementation feasible. Conclusion PNSP implementation is not just a question of having evidence of injecting drug use in the hands of prison authorities. For PNSP to be feasible in the prison environment, there is a need for specific changes to transition from one historical period and political leadership to another. And, thus, to make PNSP work requires making power work for change, and not just for reproducing the power itself.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document