Don Des Jarlais1, Pham Minh Khue2, Jonathan Feelemyer3, Kamyar Arasteh3, Duong Thi Huong2, Khuat Thi Hai Oanh4, Hoang Thi Giang2, Nham Thi Tuyet Thanh4, Vu Hai Vinh5, Douglas D Heckathorn6, Jean Pierre Moles7, Roselyne Vallo7, Catherine Quillet7, Delphine Rapoud7, Laurent Michel8, Didier Laureillard9, Ted Hammett10, Nicolas Nagot7. 1. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1 Gustave L. Levy Pl, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: ddesjarlais@chpnet.org. 2. Hai Phong University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 72 Nguyen Binh Khiem, Hai Phong, Viet Nam. 3. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1 Gustave L. Levy Pl, New York, NY, USA. 4. Supporting Community Development Initiatives, 240 Mai Anh Tuan, Hanoi, Viet Nam. 5. Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, Viet Tiep Hospital, Hai Ba Trung, Cat Dai, Hai Phong, Viet Nam. 6. Department of Sociology, Cornell University, 323 Uris Hall, Ithaca, NY, USA. 7. Etablissement Français du Sang, University of Montpellier, 163 Rue Auguste Broussonnet, Montpellier, France. 8. Pierre Nicole Center, French Red Cross, 27 Rue Pierre Nicole, Paris, France. 9. Etablissement Français du Sang, University of Montpellier, 163 Rue Auguste Broussonnet, Montpellier, France; Infectious Diseases Department, Caremeau University Hospital, Rue du Professeur Robert Debre, Nîmes, France. 10. Abt Associates, 55 Wheeler Street, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Good estimates of key population sizes are critical for appropriating resources to prevent HIV infection. We conducted two capture/recapture studies to estimate the number of PWID currently in Hai Phong, Vietnam. METHODS: A 2014 respondent-driven sampling (RDS) survey served as one capture, and distribution of cigarette lighters at drug use "hotspots" in 2016 served as another "capture." A 2016 survey using RDS, conducted 1 week after lighter distribution, served as "recapture" for both captures. Recaptured participants in the two surveys were identified with a computerized fingerprint reader. Recaptured participants from the lighter distribution were asked to show their lighters. RESULTS: 1385 participants were included in the "recapture" survey. They were 94% male and had a median age of 39. All (100%) injected heroin, and HIV prevalence was 30%. 144 of the 603 participants in the 2014 survey and 152 of the 600 PWID who had received lighters were "recaptured" in the 2016 survey. After adjusting for police suppression of drug use hotspots and conducting sensitivity analyses, our best estimate of the population size from the lighter recapture was 4617 (95% CI: 4090-5143), and our best estimate from the 2014 survey recapture was 5220 (95% CI: 4568-5872). A combined best estimate of the PWID population in Hai Phong is 5000, range 4000-6000. CONCLUSIONS: The capture/recapture studies produced consistent estimates. Adding a lighter/token distribution to planned RDS surveys may provide an inexpensive method for estimating PWID population size. Analyses of the estimates should include contextual information about the local drug scene.
BACKGROUND: Good estimates of key population sizes are critical for appropriating resources to prevent HIV infection. We conducted two capture/recapture studies to estimate the number of PWID currently in Hai Phong, Vietnam. METHODS: A 2014 respondent-driven sampling (RDS) survey served as one capture, and distribution of cigarette lighters at drug use "hotspots" in 2016 served as another "capture." A 2016 survey using RDS, conducted 1 week after lighter distribution, served as "recapture" for both captures. Recaptured participants in the two surveys were identified with a computerized fingerprint reader. Recaptured participants from the lighter distribution were asked to show their lighters. RESULTS: 1385 participants were included in the "recapture" survey. They were 94% male and had a median age of 39. All (100%) injected heroin, and HIV prevalence was 30%. 144 of the 603 participants in the 2014 survey and 152 of the 600 PWID who had received lighters were "recaptured" in the 2016 survey. After adjusting for police suppression of drug use hotspots and conducting sensitivity analyses, our best estimate of the population size from the lighter recapture was 4617 (95% CI: 4090-5143), and our best estimate from the 2014 survey recapture was 5220 (95% CI: 4568-5872). A combined best estimate of the PWID population in Hai Phong is 5000, range 4000-6000. CONCLUSIONS: The capture/recapture studies produced consistent estimates. Adding a lighter/token distribution to planned RDS surveys may provide an inexpensive method for estimating PWID population size. Analyses of the estimates should include contextual information about the local drug scene.
Authors: M Frischer; A Leyland; R Cormack; D J Goldberg; M Bloor; S T Green; A Taylor; R Covell; N McKeganey; S Platt Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1993-08-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Theodore M Hammett; Nguyen Thu Trang; Khuat Thi Hai Oanh; Nguyen Thi Huong; Le Minh Giang; Duong Thi Huong; Nicolas Nagot; Don C Des Jarlais Journal: J Public Health Policy Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 2.222
Authors: Heather Bradley; Elizabeth M Rosenthal; Meredith A Barranco; Tomoko Udo; Patrick S Sullivan; Eli S Rosenberg Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2020-09-02 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Reena H Doshi; Kevin Apodaca; Moses Ogwal; Rommel Bain; Ermias Amene; Herbert Kiyingi; George Aluzimbi; Geofrey Musinguzi; David Serwadda; Anne F McIntyre; Wolfgang Hladik Journal: JMIR Public Health Surveill Date: 2019-08-12
Authors: Don C Des Jarlais; Kamyar Arasteh; Duong Thi Huong; Khuat Thi Hai Oanh; Jonathan P Feelemyer; Pham Minh Khue; Hoang Thi Giang; Nham Thi Tuyet Thanh; Vu Hai Vinh; Sao Mai Le; Roselyne Vallo; Catherine Quillet; Delphine Rapoud; Laurent Michel; Didier Laureillard; Jean Pierre Moles; Nicolas Nagot Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-11-18 Impact factor: 3.240