Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36855064›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2023

"There's absolutely no downside to this, I mean, except community opposition:" A qualitative study of the acceptability of vending machines for harm reduction.

Rebecca E Stewart, Nicholas C Cardamone, Emily Loscalzo, Rachel French, Collin Lovelace, Winna Koe Mowenn, Ali Tarhini, Linden Lalley-Chareczko, Kathleen A Brady, David S Mandell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Harm reduction journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rebecca E StewartUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. Rebecca.Stewart@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Nicholas C CardamoneUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Emily LoscalzoPhiladelphia FIGHT Community Health Centers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Rachel FrenchUniversity of Pennsylvania School of Nursing, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Collin LovelaceUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Winna Koe MowennPhiladelphia FIGHT Community Health Centers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Ali TarhiniPhiladelphia FIGHT Community Health Centers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Linden Lalley-ChareczkoPhiladelphia FIGHT Community Health Centers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Kathleen A BradyPhiladelphia Department of Public Health, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
David S MandellUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
University of Pennsylvania · USPhiladelphia Fight · USPhiladelphia Department of Public Health · US

Funding

Virus & Reservoirs CoreP30AI045008 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Ronald G Collman · 1999 to 2026
$78.6M
Penn Mental Health AIDS Research CenterP30MH097488 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Karine Dube, Kelly L Jordan-Sciutto · 2013 to 2026
$23.5M
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI045008NIMH NIH HHS P30 MH097488
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVending machines for harm reduction (VMHR) are an innovative approach to deliver life-saving materials, information, and treatment for hard-to-reach populations, particularly for persons who inject drugs. The current study explores stakeholders' perspectives on the feasibility and acceptability of VMHR in Philadelphia.

methodsFrom October 2021 to February 2022, we conducted 31 semi-structured interviews with potential end users, staff, and leadership at a local federally qualified health center, and community members. Trained coders extracted themes from interview transcripts across four key domains: materials and logistics, location, access, and community introduction.

resultsInterviewees from all stakeholder groups endorsed using VMHR to provide supplies for wound care, fentanyl test strips, naloxone, and materials to connect individuals to treatment and other services. Dispensing syringes and medications for opioid use disorder were commonly endorsed by health center staff but were more controversial among potential end users. Even within stakeholder groups, views varied with respect to where to locate the machines, but most agreed that the machine should be placed in the highest drug use areas. Across stakeholder groups, interviewees suggested several strategies to introduce and gain community acceptance of VMHR, including community education, one-on-one conversations with community members, and coupling the machine with safe disposal of syringes and information to link individuals to treatment.

conclusionsStakeholders were generally receptive to VMHR. The current study findings are consistent with qualitative analyses from outside of the USA and contribute new ideas regarding the anticipated community response and best methods for introducing these machines to a community. With thoughtful planning and design, VMHR could be a feasible and acceptable modality to reduce death and disease transmission associated with the opioid and HIV epidemics in cities like Philadelphia.

Indexed as

Drug UsersSubstance Abuse, IntravenousHarm ReductionHumansQualitative ResearchSyringesHarm reductionHIVOpioid use disorderVending machines for harm reduction

Identifiers

PMID36855064
PMCPMC9971672
OpenAlexW4322719013

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.