Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31672169›Full record

ArticleAddiction science & clinical practice2019

How to overcome political and legal barriers to the implementation of a drug consumption room: an application of the policy agenda framework to the Belgian situation.

Pierre Smith, Louis Favril, Dominique Delhauteur, Freya Vander Laenen, Pablo Nicaise

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addiction science & clinical practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Policy windows for drug consumption rooms in Finland.Nordisk alkohol- & narkotikatidskrift : NAT · 2022
    Article
  4. Drug Consumption Rooms and Public Health Policy: Perspectives of Scottish Strategic Decision-Makers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. French People's positions on supervised injection facilities for drug users.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Pierre SmithInstitute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs, 30, 1200, Brussels, Belgium. pierre.smith@uclouvain.be.ORCID 0000-0003-3178-9924
Louis FavrilInstitute for International Research on Criminal Policy (IRCP), Faculty of Law and Criminology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Dominique DelhauteurFondation privée TADAM, Liège, Belgium.
Freya Vander LaenenInstitute for International Research on Criminal Policy (IRCP), Faculty of Law and Criminology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Pablo NicaiseInstitute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs, 30, 1200, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor more than 30 years, drug consumption rooms (DCRs) have been implemented in Western countries. DCRs are supported by a large body of evidence about public safety and public health effectiveness. However, a political consensus has never been achieved in Belgium on amending the existing law that explicitly penalises the supply of a room for facilitating drug use. Despite this adverse legal and policy framework, a DCR opened in the city of Liège in 2018. In this case report, we applied the theoretical framework proposed by Shiffman and Smith for policy agenda setting, in order to describe and assess how political and legal barriers were overcome in the process of opening the DCR. CASE PRESENTATION: For some years, fieldworkers and some city policymakers argued for DCR implementation in Belgium, but without gaining the support of the national authorities, mainly for ideological reasons. In order to address this debate, a feasibility study of DCR implementation in Belgian cities was commissioned. At the national level, an institutional debate took place about the political responsibility for DCRs as a public health intervention, as health care is mainly a matter of regional policy. The lack of consensus led to a situation of political deadlock. Meanwhile, the publication of the study report and the context of local elections offered an opportunity for Liège authorities to reignite the local debate on DCRs. At the local level, law enforcement, care professionals, residents, users, and the press were all involved in the implementation process. Therefore, a local consensus was formed and despite the absence of any national legal change, the DCR opened 1 month before the local elections. It has been working without major medical or legal incident since then. Incidentally, the mayor of Liège was re-elected.

conclusionsAlthough the lack of a legal framework may engender instability and affect longer-term effectiveness, the DCR implementation in Liège was successful and was based on a local consensus and effective communication rather than on an appropriate legal framework. The experience provides lessons for other cities that are considering opening a DCR despite an adverse legal and political context.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionLegislation as TopicPoliticsBelgiumHealth PolicyHumansSubstance-Related DisordersDrug consumption roomDrug policyImplementation

Identifiers

PMID31672169
PMCPMC6823966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.