scholarly journals Response to Marsden et al (2020): Mitigation for the impacts on needle and syringe programmes is needed

Addiction ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 116 (1) ◽  
pp. 206-207
Author(s):  
Mark Whitfield ◽  
Howard Reed ◽  
Jane Webster ◽  
Vivian Hope

2013 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 235-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther J Aspinall ◽  
Dhanya Nambiar ◽  
David J Goldberg ◽  
Matthew Hickman ◽  
Amanda Weir ◽  
...  


2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Kermode ◽  
Anthony Harris ◽  
Elena Gospodarevskaya


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo M Fernandes ◽  
Maria Cary ◽  
Gonçalo Duarte ◽  
Gonçalo Jesus ◽  
Joana Alarcão ◽  
...  


2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 353-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret MacDonald ◽  
Matthew Law ◽  
John Kaldor ◽  
Jim Hales ◽  
Gregory J. Dore


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e026298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier A Cepeda ◽  
Jose Luis Burgos ◽  
James G Kahn ◽  
Rosario Padilla ◽  
Pedro Emilio Meza Martinez ◽  
...  

ObjectiveFrom 2011 to 2013, the Global Fund (GF) supported needle and syringe programmes in Mexico to prevent transmission of HIV among people who inject drugs. It remains unclear how GF withdrawal affected the costs, quality and coverage of needle and syringe programme provision.DesignCosting study and longitudinal cohort study.SettingTijuana, Mexico.ParticipantsPersonnel from a local needle and syringe programme (n=6) and people who inject drugs (n=734) participating in a longitudinal study.Primary outcome measuresProvision of needle and syringe programme services and cost (per contact and per syringe distributed, in 2017 $USD) during GF support (2012) and after withdrawal (2015/16). An additional outcome included needle and syringe programme utilisation from a concurrent cohort of people who inject drugs during and after GF withdrawal.ResultsDuring the GF period, the needle and syringe programme distributed 55 920 syringes to 932 contacts (60 syringes/contact) across 14 geographical locations. After GF withdrew, the needle and syringe programme distributed 10 700 syringes to 2140 contacts (five syringes/contact) across three geographical locations. During the GF period, the cost per harm reduction contact was approximately 10-fold higher compared with after GF ($44.72 vs $3.81); however, the cost per syringe distributed was nearly equal ($0.75 vs $0.76) due to differences in syringes per contact and reductions in ancillary kit components. The mean log odds of accessing a needle and syringe programme in the post-GF period was significantly lower than during the GF period (p=0.02).ConclusionsWithdrawal of GF support for needle and syringe programme provision in Mexico was associated with a substantial drop in provision of sterile syringes, geographical coverage and recent clean syringe utilisation among people who inject drugs. Better planning is required to ensure harm reduction programme sustainability is at scale after donor withdrawal.



2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 160-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loren Brener ◽  
Catherine Spooner ◽  
Carla Treloar


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 767-777 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim McVeigh ◽  
Evelyn Hearne ◽  
Geoff Bates ◽  
Marie Claire Van Hout


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document