Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34273986›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2021

Injections and infections: understanding syringe service program utilization in a rural state.

Kinna Thakarar, Nitysari Sankar, Kimberly Murray, Frances L Lucas, Debra Burris, Robert P Smith

Abstract read
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 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Kinna ThakararCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation/Maine Medical Center Research Institute, 509 Forest Ave, Portland, ME, USA. kthakarar@mmc.org.ORCID 0000-0003-4689-0240
Nitysari SankarUniversity of New England College of Osteopathic Medicine, Biddeford, ME, USA.
Kimberly MurrayCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation/Maine Medical Center Research Institute, 509 Forest Ave, Portland, ME, USA.
Frances L LucasCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation/Maine Medical Center Research Institute, 509 Forest Ave, Portland, ME, USA.
Debra BurrisCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation/Maine Medical Center Research Institute, 509 Forest Ave, Portland, ME, USA.
Robert P SmithCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation/Maine Medical Center Research Institute, 509 Forest Ave, Portland, ME, USA.

Funding

Understanding Factors Influencing COVID-19 Testing and Vaccination in Immigrant Low-income and Homeless Populations and Testing Targeted InterventionsU54GM115516 · NIGMS · MAINEHEALTH · PI Frances E. Carr · 2017 to 2026
$51.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM115516NIH HHS U54 GM115516
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing rates of injection drug use (IDU) associated-infections suggest significant syringe service program (SSP) underutilization. Our study objective was to assess practices of safe injection techniques and to determine predictors of SSP utilization in a rural state. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis was a fifteen-month cross-sectional study of participants hospitalized with IDU-associated infections in Maine. Data were collected through Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview survey and medical record review. Descriptive analyses were performed to characterize demographics, health characteristics, and injection practices. The primary outcome was SSP utilization, and the main independent variable was self-reported distance to SSP. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated SSP utilization, controlling for gender, homelessness, history of overdose, having a primary care physician and distance to SSP.

resultsOf the 101 study participants, 65 participants (64%) reported past 3 month SSP utilization, though only 33% used SSPs frequently. Many participants (57%) lived more than 10 miles from an SSP. Participants who lived less than 10 miles of an SSP were more likely to use an SSP (adjusted odds ratio 5.4; 95% CI 1.9-15.7).

conclusionsOur study highlights unsafe injection practices and lack of frequent SSP utilization among people admitted with IDU-associated infections in a rural state. Especially given increasing stimulant use, these results also highlight the need for SSP access. Particularly in rural areas where patients may live more than 10 miles from an SSP, expansion of harm reduction services, including mobile units, should be a priority.

Indexed as

Substance Abuse, IntravenousSyringesCross-Sectional StudiesHarm ReductionHumansNeedle-Exchange ProgramsInjection drug use (IDU)Injections and infectionsRural StateSyringe ServiceSyringe service program (SSP)

Identifiers

PMID34273986
PMCPMC8285696

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.