Felix Betzler1, Jonas Helbig2, Leonard Viohl2, Felicitas Ernst2, Lukas Roediger2, Stefan Gutwinski2, Andreas Ströhle2, Stephan Köhler2. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany, felix.betzler@charite.de. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Drug checking as a tool for harm reduction is offered in certain cities throughout Europe, the USA, and Australia, but in general, it is internationally still scarcely available and controversially discussed. This study aimed at investigating the potential impact of a drug-checking offer on Berlin nightlife attendees' illicit drug use and at identifying the encouraging and discouraging factors for using or refraining from such an offer. METHODS: Using an online questionnaire, we conducted a cross-sectional survey in a Berlin party scene. A total of 719 people participated in the survey that took part in 2019. RESULTS: The vast majority of participants (92%) stated that they would use drug checking, if existent. If the test revealed the sample to contain a high amount of active ingredient, 91% indicated to take less of the substance than usual. Two-thirds (66%) would discharge the sample if it contained an unexpected/unwanted agent along with the intended substance. If the sample contained only unexpected/unwanted substances and not the intended substance at all, 93% stated to discharge the sample. Additional brief counseling was stated to be useful. Participants showed a comparatively high substance use. CONCLUSIONS: Drug checking as a harm reduction tool was highly accepted in the scene, and the majority of participants stated to align their consumption behavior accordingly, in a reasonable manner. A concomitant consultation would be appreciated, which may be used to direct educational information about harms and risks to users.
OBJECTIVES: Drug checking as a tool for harm reduction is offered in certain cities throughout Europe, the USA, and Australia, but in general, it is internationally still scarcely available and controversially discussed. This study aimed at investigating the potential impact of a drug-checking offer on Berlin nightlife attendees' illicit drug use and at identifying the encouraging and discouraging factors for using or refraining from such an offer. METHODS: Using an online questionnaire, we conducted a cross-sectional survey in a Berlin party scene. A total of 719 people participated in the survey that took part in 2019. RESULTS: The vast majority of participants (92%) stated that they would use drug checking, if existent. If the test revealed the sample to contain a high amount of active ingredient, 91% indicated to take less of the substance than usual. Two-thirds (66%) would discharge the sample if it contained an unexpected/unwanted agent along with the intended substance. If the sample contained only unexpected/unwanted substances and not the intended substance at all, 93% stated to discharge the sample. Additional brief counseling was stated to be useful. Participants showed a comparatively high substance use. CONCLUSIONS: Drug checking as a harm reduction tool was highly accepted in the scene, and the majority of participants stated to align their consumption behavior accordingly, in a reasonable manner. A concomitant consultation would be appreciated, which may be used to direct educational information about harms and risks to users.
Authors: Antonia Bendau; Leonard Viohl; Moritz Bruno Petzold; Jonas Helbig; Simon Reiche; Roman Marek; Amy Romanello; Daa Un Moon; Rosa Elisa Gross; Dario Jalilzadeh Masah; Stefan Gutwinski; Inge Mick; Christiane Montag; Ricarda Evens; Tomislav Majić; Felix Betzler Journal: Int J Drug Policy Date: 2022-01-05
Authors: Wendy Masterton; Danilo Falzon; Gillian Burton; Hannah Carver; Bruce Wallace; Elizabeth V Aston; Harry Sumnall; Fiona Measham; Rosalind Gittins; Vicki Craik; Joe Schofield; Simon Little; Tessa Parkes Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-22 Impact factor: 4.614