Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35020166›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022

Reduced Emergency Department Visits and Hospitalisation with Use of an Unsanctioned Safe Consumption Site for Injection Drug Use in the United States.

Barrot H Lambdin, Peter J Davidson, Erica N Browne, Leslie W Suen, Lynn D Wenger, Alex H Kral

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. A Decentralized Model for Supervised Consumption Services.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2022
    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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Barrot H LambdinRTI International, 2150 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 800, Berkeley, CA, 94704, USA. blambdin@rti.org.ORCID 0000-0001-8546-0126
Peter J DavidsonUniversity of California San Diego, 9500 Gillman Drive, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Erica N BrowneRTI International, 2150 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 800, Berkeley, CA, 94704, USA.
Leslie W SuenUniversity of California San Francisco, 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Lynn D WengerRTI International, 2150 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 800, Berkeley, CA, 94704, USA.
Alex H KralRTI International, 2150 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 800, Berkeley, CA, 94704, USA.
RTI International · USSeattle Pacific University · USUniversity of California San Diego · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSafe consumption sites (SCS) are an evidence-based intervention to prevent drug use-related harm. In late 2014, an organisation in an undisclosed location in the USA opened an unsanctioned SCS.

objectiveTo evaluate whether use of the unsanctioned SCS affected medical outcomes.

designA prospective cohort study.

settingNeighbourhoods surrounding the SCS.

participantsPeople who injected drugs were recruited and interviewed at baseline and 6 and 12 months from 2018 to 2020.

interventionPeople using the SCS could bring pre-obtained drugs to consume via injection, which were monitored by trained staff with naloxone. MAIN MEASURES: Any overdose, number of non-fatal overdoses, skin and soft tissue infections, emergency department utilisation, number of emergency department visits, hospitalisation and number of nights spent in hospital. KEY

resultsA total of 494 participants enrolled in the study; 59 (12%) used the SCS at least once. We used propensity score weighting to analyse the association between SCS utilisation and measures. People using the SCS were 27% (95% CI: 12-46%) less likely to visit the emergency department, had 54% (95% CI: 33-71%) fewer emergency department visits, were 32% (95% CI: 4-57%) less likely to be hospitalised, and spent 50% (95% CI: 1-85%) fewer nights in hospital. Though not significant, people using the SCS had a lower likelihood of overdosing and slightly higher likelihood of skin and soft tissue infections.

conclusionsOur findings support the use of SCS in the USA to reduce the growing burden of acute care service utilisation related to injection drug use.

Indexed as

Drug OverdoseSoft Tissue InfectionsEmergency Service, HospitalHospitalizationHumansProspective StudiesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID35020166
PMCPMC8753940
OpenAlexW4206690187

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.