OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify factors associated with harmful microinjecting practices in a longitudinal cohort of IDU. METHODS: Using data from the Vancouver Injection Drug Users Study (VIDUS) between January 2004 and December 2005, generalized estimating equations (GEE) logistic regression was performed to examine sociodemographic and behavioral factors associated with four harmful microinjecting practices (frequent rushed injecting, frequent syringe borrowing, frequently injecting with a used water capsule, frequently injecting alone). RESULTS: In total, 620 participants were included in the present analysis. Our study included 251 (40.5%) women and 203 (32.7%) self-identified Aboriginal participants. The median age was 31.9 (interquartile range: 23.4-39.3). GEE analyses found that each harmful microinjecting practice was associated with a unique profile of sociodemographic and behavioral factors. DISCUSSION: We observed high rates of harmful microinjecting practices among IDU. The present study describes the epidemiology of harmful microinjecting practices and points to the need for strategies that target higher risk individuals including the use of peer-driven programs and drug-specific approaches in an effort to promote safer injecting practices.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify factors associated with harmful microinjecting practices in a longitudinal cohort of IDU. METHODS: Using data from the Vancouver Injection Drug Users Study (VIDUS) between January 2004 and December 2005, generalized estimating equations (GEE) logistic regression was performed to examine sociodemographic and behavioral factors associated with four harmful microinjecting practices (frequent rushed injecting, frequent syringe borrowing, frequently injecting with a used water capsule, frequently injecting alone). RESULTS: In total, 620 participants were included in the present analysis. Our study included 251 (40.5%) women and 203 (32.7%) self-identified Aboriginal participants. The median age was 31.9 (interquartile range: 23.4-39.3). GEE analyses found that each harmful microinjecting practice was associated with a unique profile of sociodemographic and behavioral factors. DISCUSSION: We observed high rates of harmful microinjecting practices among IDU. The present study describes the epidemiology of harmful microinjecting practices and points to the need for strategies that target higher risk individuals including the use of peer-driven programs and drug-specific approaches in an effort to promote safer injecting practices.
Authors: D M Patrick; M W Tyndall; P G Cornelisse; K Li; C H Sherlock; M L Rekart; S A Strathdee; S L Currie; M T Schechter; M V O'Shaughnessy Journal: CMAJ Date: 2001-10-02 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: R S Broadhead; D D Heckathorn; D L Weakliem; D L Anthony; H Madray; R J Mills; J Hughes Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 1998-06 Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Patricia M Spittal; Kevin J P Craib; Mary Teegee; Catherine Baylis; Wayne M Christian; A K M Moniruzzaman; Martin T Schechter Journal: Int J Circumpolar Health Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 1.228
Authors: Kristina T Phillips; Bradley J Anderson; Debra S Herman; Jane M Liebschutz; Michael D Stein Journal: J Addict Med Date: 2017 Nov/Dec Impact factor: 3.702