Limits...
A drug use survey among clients of harm reduction sites across British Columbia, Canada, 2012.

Kuo M, Shamsian A, Tzemis D, Buxton JA - Harm Reduct J (2014)

Bottom Line: Respondents surveyed in or near their region's major centre were more likely to report having used crack cocaine (p < 0.0001) and heroin (p < 0.0001) in the past week as compared to those residing >50 km from the major centre.Participating sites found the survey process acceptable, feasible to administer annually, and useful for responding to client needs.Drug use frequencies differed substantially by region and community proximity to the regional centre, underlining the need for locally collected data to inform service planning.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, 655 West 12th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4R4, Canada. margot.kuo@bccdc.ca.

ABSTRACT

Background: In British Columbia (BC), understanding of high-risk drug use trends is largely based on survey and cohort study data from two major cities, which may not be representative of persons who use drugs in other regions. Harm reduction stakeholders, representing each of the five geographic health regions in BC, identified a need for data on drug use to inform local and regional harm reduction activities across the province. The aims of this project were to (1) develop a drug use survey that could be feasibly administered at harm reduction (HR) sites across all health regions and (2) assess the data for differences in reported drug use frequencies by region.

Methods: A pilot survey focusing on current drug use was developed with stakeholders and administered among clients at 28 HR supply distribution sites across the province by existing staff and peers. Data were collated and analysed using univariate and bivariate descriptive statistics to assess differences in reported drug use frequencies by geography. A post-survey evaluation was conducted to assess acceptability and feasibility of the survey process for participating sites.

Results: Crack cocaine, heroin, and morphine were the most frequently reported drugs with notable regional differences. Polysubstance use was common among respondents (70%) with one region having 81% polysubstance use. Respondents surveyed in or near their region's major centre were more likely to report having used crack cocaine (p‚ÄČ<‚ÄČ0.0001) and heroin (p‚ÄČ<‚ÄČ0.0001) in the past week as compared to those residing >50 km from the major centre. Participants accessing services >50 km from the regional centre were more likely to have used morphine (p‚ÄČ<‚ÄČ0.0001). There was no difference in powder cocaine use by client/site proximity to the regional centre. Participating sites found the survey process acceptable, feasible to administer annually, and useful for responding to client needs.

Conclusions: The survey was a feasible way for harm reduction sites across BC to obtain drug use data from clients who actively use drugs. Drug use frequencies differed substantially by region and community proximity to the regional centre, underlining the need for locally collected data to inform service planning.

Show MeSH
Post-pilot survey. Post-pilot survey responses BC, (N‚ÄČ=‚ÄČ28 HR sites). See Figure¬†3 for complete statements and Likert scale.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4016659&req=5

Figure 7: Post-pilot survey. Post-pilot survey responses BC, (N‚ÄČ=‚ÄČ28 HR sites). See Figure¬†3 for complete statements and Likert scale.

Mentions: In the post-survey questionnaire (Figure 7), pilot sites were in agreement with running the survey once each year, but fewer felt that it was feasible twice per year. Approximately 70% of the sites found the survey wording of questions clear; those sites that did not find the wording of all questions clear were asked for further input to improve clarity. Over 90% of the sites stated that they valued the information covered by the survey questions for their own knowledge and planning. Over 80% of the sites found the process non-disruptive, while others provided input into making the process less disruptive. Sites with low supply distribution volumes and staff numbers generally found it more challenging to administer the survey, but this also depended on the service model. Subjective refusal and non-completion levels were universally felt to be very low and acceptable, and this was attributed to the stipend offered to clients for their participation. Over 80% of sites reported that survey administration by site staff or peers (versus self-administration by clients) was necessary for both data quality and to maintain other benefits such as rapport building with clients.


A drug use survey among clients of harm reduction sites across British Columbia, Canada, 2012.

Kuo M, Shamsian A, Tzemis D, Buxton JA - Harm Reduct J (2014)

Post-pilot survey. Post-pilot survey responses BC, (N‚ÄČ=‚ÄČ28 HR sites). See Figure¬†3 for complete statements and Likert scale.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4016659&req=5

Figure 7: Post-pilot survey. Post-pilot survey responses BC, (N‚ÄČ=‚ÄČ28 HR sites). See Figure¬†3 for complete statements and Likert scale.
Mentions: In the post-survey questionnaire (Figure 7), pilot sites were in agreement with running the survey once each year, but fewer felt that it was feasible twice per year. Approximately 70% of the sites found the survey wording of questions clear; those sites that did not find the wording of all questions clear were asked for further input to improve clarity. Over 90% of the sites stated that they valued the information covered by the survey questions for their own knowledge and planning. Over 80% of the sites found the process non-disruptive, while others provided input into making the process less disruptive. Sites with low supply distribution volumes and staff numbers generally found it more challenging to administer the survey, but this also depended on the service model. Subjective refusal and non-completion levels were universally felt to be very low and acceptable, and this was attributed to the stipend offered to clients for their participation. Over 80% of sites reported that survey administration by site staff or peers (versus self-administration by clients) was necessary for both data quality and to maintain other benefits such as rapport building with clients.

Bottom Line: Respondents surveyed in or near their region's major centre were more likely to report having used crack cocaine (p < 0.0001) and heroin (p < 0.0001) in the past week as compared to those residing >50 km from the major centre.Participating sites found the survey process acceptable, feasible to administer annually, and useful for responding to client needs.Drug use frequencies differed substantially by region and community proximity to the regional centre, underlining the need for locally collected data to inform service planning.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, 655 West 12th Avenue, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4R4, Canada. margot.kuo@bccdc.ca.

ABSTRACT

Background: In British Columbia (BC), understanding of high-risk drug use trends is largely based on survey and cohort study data from two major cities, which may not be representative of persons who use drugs in other regions. Harm reduction stakeholders, representing each of the five geographic health regions in BC, identified a need for data on drug use to inform local and regional harm reduction activities across the province. The aims of this project were to (1) develop a drug use survey that could be feasibly administered at harm reduction (HR) sites across all health regions and (2) assess the data for differences in reported drug use frequencies by region.

Methods: A pilot survey focusing on current drug use was developed with stakeholders and administered among clients at 28 HR supply distribution sites across the province by existing staff and peers. Data were collated and analysed using univariate and bivariate descriptive statistics to assess differences in reported drug use frequencies by geography. A post-survey evaluation was conducted to assess acceptability and feasibility of the survey process for participating sites.

Results: Crack cocaine, heroin, and morphine were the most frequently reported drugs with notable regional differences. Polysubstance use was common among respondents (70%) with one region having 81% polysubstance use. Respondents surveyed in or near their region's major centre were more likely to report having used crack cocaine (p‚ÄČ<‚ÄČ0.0001) and heroin (p‚ÄČ<‚ÄČ0.0001) in the past week as compared to those residing >50 km from the major centre. Participants accessing services >50 km from the regional centre were more likely to have used morphine (p‚ÄČ<‚ÄČ0.0001). There was no difference in powder cocaine use by client/site proximity to the regional centre. Participating sites found the survey process acceptable, feasible to administer annually, and useful for responding to client needs.

Conclusions: The survey was a feasible way for harm reduction sites across BC to obtain drug use data from clients who actively use drugs. Drug use frequencies differed substantially by region and community proximity to the regional centre, underlining the need for locally collected data to inform service planning.

Show MeSH