The validity of reporting willingness to use a supervised injecting facility on subsequent program use among people who use injection drugs
- PMID: 21834612
- PMCID: PMC3730831
- DOI: 10.3109/00952990.2011.600389
The validity of reporting willingness to use a supervised injecting facility on subsequent program use among people who use injection drugs
Abstract
Background: Innovative health programs for injection drug users (IDUs), such as supervised injecting facilities (SIFs), are often preceded by evaluations of IDUs' willingness to use the service. The validity of these surveys has not been fully evaluated. We sought to determine whether measures of willingness collected prior to the opening of a Canadian SIF accurately predicted subsequent use of the program.
Methods: Data were derived from a prospective cohort of IDUs. The sample size for this study was 640 IDUs. Using multivariate logistic regression, it was assessed if a history of reporting willingness to use the program, were it available, was associated with subsequent use. In sub-analysis restricted to individuals who had a history of reported willingness, we used multivariate longitudinal analysis to identify factors associated with not attending the SIF.
Results: Among 442 IDUs, 72% of those who reported initial willingness to use a SIF later attended the program, and a prior willingness to use a SIF significantly predicted later attendance (adjusted odds ratio = 1.67). In sub-analyses restricted to those who had a history of reporting willingness to use the SIF, not using the program was predicted by not frequenting the neighborhood where the SIF was located.
Conclusion: Our findings indicate that reported willingness measures collected from IDUs regarding potential SIF program participation prior to its opening independently predicted later attendance even when variables that were likely determinants of willingness were adjusted for. These data suggest that willingness measures are reasonably valid tools for planning the delivery of health services among IDU populations.
Conflict of interest statement
Dr. Julio Montaner has received grants from, served as an ad hoc advisor to, or spoke at various events sponsored by Abbott, Argos Therapeutics, Bioject Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen-Ortho, Merck Frosst, Pfizer, Schering, Serono Inc., TheraTechnologies, Tibotec, and Trimeris. The authors declare no other competing interests.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Willingness to access an in-hospital supervised injection facility among hospitalized people who use illicit drugs.J Hosp Med. 2015 May;10(5):301-6. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2344. Epub 2015 Mar 5. J Hosp Med. 2015. PMID: 25754871 Free PMC article.
-
The potential public health and community impacts of safer injecting facilities: evidence from a cohort of injection drug users.J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003 Jan 1;32(1):2-8. doi: 10.1097/00126334-200301010-00002. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003. PMID: 12514408
-
My place, your place, or a safer place: the intention among Montréal injecting drug users to use supervised injecting facilities.Can J Public Health. 2004 Mar-Apr;95(2):110-4. doi: 10.1007/BF03405777. Can J Public Health. 2004. PMID: 15074900 Free PMC article.
-
Willingness to use a supervised injection facility among young adults who use prescription opioids non-medically: a cross-sectional study.Harm Reduct J. 2017 Feb 20;14(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s12954-017-0139-0. Harm Reduct J. 2017. PMID: 28219388 Free PMC article.
-
Supervised injection facilities in Canada: past, present, and future.Harm Reduct J. 2017 May 18;14(1):28. doi: 10.1186/s12954-017-0154-1. Harm Reduct J. 2017. PMID: 28521829 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Factors associated with willingness to participate in a pharmacologic addiction treatment clinical trial among people who use drugs.Am J Addict. 2015 Jun;24(4):368-73. doi: 10.1111/ajad.12200. Epub 2015 Mar 24. Am J Addict. 2015. PMID: 25808644 Free PMC article.
-
High willingness to use rapid fentanyl test strips among young adults who use drugs.Harm Reduct J. 2018 Feb 8;15(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s12954-018-0213-2. Harm Reduct J. 2018. PMID: 29422052 Free PMC article.
-
Feasibility, acceptability, concerns, and challenges of implementing supervised injection services at a specialty HIV hospital in Toronto, Canada: perspectives of people living with HIV.BMC Public Health. 2021 Jul 29;21(1):1482. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11507-z. BMC Public Health. 2021. PMID: 34325681 Free PMC article.
-
Four decades of overdose prevention centres: lessons for the future from a realist review.Harm Reduct J. 2025 Mar 20;22(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s12954-025-01178-z. Harm Reduct J. 2025. PMID: 40114190 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Factors associated with willingness to wear an electronic overdose detection device.Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2019 Jul 3;14(1):23. doi: 10.1186/s13722-019-0153-5. Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2019. PMID: 31269963 Free PMC article.
References
-
- DeBeck K, Wood E, Montaner J, Kerr T. Canada’s 2003 renewed drug strategy – An evidence-based review. HIV AIDS Policy Law Rev. 2006;11(2–3):1, 5–12. - PubMed
-
- Rhodes T. ‘The risk environment’: A framework for understanding and reducing drug-related harm. Int J Drug Policy. 2002;13(2):85–94.
-
- Rowden D, Dorsey P, Bullman S, Lestina R, Han C, Herrell J. HIV outreach for hard-to-reach populations: A cross-site perspective. Eval Program Plann. 1999;22(3):251–258. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources