Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33596940›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2021

Adapting harm reduction services during COVID-19: lessons from the supervised injecting facilities in Australia.

Amanda Roxburgh, Marianne Jauncey, Carolyn Day, Mark Bartlett, Shelley Cogger, Paul Dietze, Suzanne Nielsen, Julie Latimer, Nico Clark

Open access · goldAbstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Harm reduction journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on access to supervised consumption programs.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Amanda RoxburghHealth Risks Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia. amanda.roxburgh@burnet.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-8609-0075
Marianne JaunceyDiscipline of Addiction Medicine, the Central Clinical School, Sydney Medical School, the Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Carolyn DayDiscipline of Addiction Medicine, the Central Clinical School, Sydney Medical School, the Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Mark BartlettUniting Medically Supervised Injecting Centre, Sydney, Australia.
Shelley CoggerNorth Richmond Community Health Medically Supervised Injecting Room, Melbourne, Australia.
Paul DietzeHealth Risks Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Suzanne NielsenHealth Risks Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Julie LatimerUniting Medically Supervised Injecting Centre, Sydney, Australia.
Nico ClarkNorth Richmond Community Health Medically Supervised Injecting Room, Melbourne, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUBurnet Institute · AUThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1173505
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 crisis has had profound impacts on health service provision, particularly those providing client facing services. Supervised injecting facilities and drug consumption rooms across the world have been particularly challenged during the pandemic, as have their client group-people who consume drugs. Several services across Europe and North America closed due to difficulties complying with physical distancing requirements. In contrast, the two supervised injecting facilities in Australia (the Uniting Medically Supervised Injecting Centre-MSIC-in Sydney and the North Richmond Community Health Medically Supervised Injecting Room-MSIR-in Melbourne) remained open (as at the time of writing-December 2020). Both services have implemented a comprehensive range of strategies to continue providing safer injecting spaces as well as communicating crucial health information and facilitating access to ancillary services (such as accommodation) and drug treatment for their clients. This paper documents these strategies and the challenges both services are facing during the pandemic. Remaining open poses potential risks relating to COVID-19 transmission for both staff and clients. However, given the harms associated with closing these services, which include the potential loss of life from injecting in unsafe/unsupervised environments, the public and individual health benefits of remaining open are greater. Both services are deemed 'essential health services', and their continued operation has important benefits for people who inject drugs in Sydney and Melbourne.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionNeedle-Exchange ProgramsPersonal Protective EquipmentPhysical DistancingAustraliaCOVID-19COVID-19 TestingDelivery of Health CareDrug OverdoseHousingHumansInfection ControlMasksNaloxoneNarcotic AntagonistsNew South WalesNaloxoneNarcotic AntagonistsCOVID-19Drug consumption roomsHarm reductionPeople who inject drugsSupervised injecting facilities

Identifiers

PMID33596940
PMCPMC7887539
OpenAlexW3132551035

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.